Sociality as a Basic Dimension of Intercultural Competences. Intercultural Education in a Sociological Perspective

Building Intercultural Competences

A Handbook for Professionals in Education, Social Work and Health Care

Maria Giovanna Onorati and Furio Bednarz(editors)

Acco Leuven / Den Haag

First edition: 2010

Published by Uitgeverij Acco, Blijde Inkomststraat 22, 3000 Leuven (België)E-mail: [email protected] – Website: www.uitgeverijacco.be

For the Netherlands:Delivery – : Centraal Boekhuis bv, CulemborgCorrespondence – : Acco Nederland, De Star 17, 2266 NA Leidschendam

Cover: www.frisco-ontwerpbureau.be

© 2010 by Acco (Academische Coöperatieve Vennootschap cvba), Leuven (België) No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by mimeograph, fi lm or any other means without permission in writing from the publisher.

D/2010/0543/180 NUR 740 ISBN 978-90-334-7971-7

This book has been published with funds of University of Valle d’Aosta – Université de la Vallée d’Aoste and of ECAP Foundation – Switzerland.

The ICIC learning Programme, to which this book is primarily devoted, was funded by the European Commission. The authors are solely responsible for this publication and the Commission disclaims all responsibility for any use that may be made of infor-mation contained within it.

Contents

Introduction 9

Maria Giovanna Onorati and Furio Bednarz

PART 1. A Multidisciplinary Theoretical Framework for Intercultural Competency 25

THE CONTRIBUTION OF PEDAGOGY TO INTERCULTURAL EDUCATION 27

1. Interculturality as an Educational Task in Global Societies 29

Angela Perucca

2. Building Up Intercultural Competences: Challenges andLearning Processes 39

Furio Bednarz

THE CONTRIBUTION OF ANTHROPOLOGY TO INTERCULTURAL EDUCATION 53

3. The Use of Hermeneutics in Dealing with Cultural Diversity 55

Attila Dobos

THE CONTRIBUTION OF SOCIOLOGY TO INTERCULTURAL EDUCATION 67

4. Understanding Diversity, Boundaries and Identifi cation in the Contextof Cultural Diversity 69

Éva Nagy & István Vingender

6 | Contents

5. Sociality as a Basic Dimension of Intercultural Competences. Intercultural Education in a Sociological Perspective 79

Maria Giovanna Onorati

PILLARS OF INTERCULTURAL EDUCATION 103

6. Unesco Guiding Principles for Intercultural Education 105

Elisa Palomba

7. “Expanding Roles” as a Condition for an Intercultural Approach to Education: The I-3 Model 111

Filip Dejonckheere

PART 2. Learning Pathways. Tools and Methods for Developing Intercultural Awareness 131

1. The Relevance of Conceptual Maps in Intercultural Education 133

Carmen Indirli

2. The Media in Intercultural Education: From Social Reproducers ofRacist Prejudice to Educational Tools to Contrast Xenophobia 147


3. Approving Skills for Caregivers: (Inter)cultural Awareness 161

Reyhan Görgöz & Eric Van der Meirsch

4. Confronting Interculturality Using City Exploration 181

Reyhan Görgöz, Tom Claeys & Johan Hoozee

5. Case Studies and Interdisciplinary Teams in SolvingIntercultural Challenges 195

Päivi Rimpioja & Mai Salmenkangas

6. Refl ective Strategies and Tools, Between Individual and SocialDimensions. Diaries, Debriefi ng Sessions, Tutoring 209

Furio Bednarz & Andrea Leoni

Contents | 7

7. Final Reports: Enhanced Refl ective Tools for Evaluating Intercultural Competences 237

Candan Oztürk

PART 3. Evaluating Intercultural Learning 245

1. Measuring the Effects of an Intercultural Learning Process:The Case of ICIC 247

Giorgio Comi

2. Social Background as a Clustering Factor of Students’ Evaluation ofthe Learning Pathway 269


References 287

5. Sociality as a Basic Dimension

of Intercultural Competences.

Intercultural Education in a

Sociological Perspective


5.1 Social capital and experiential learning: two mutually inclusive dimensions in intercultural education

In the last decade the European Union has been undergoing a rapid shifting of its bor-ders so that the context in which the different political and educational systems operate has become increasingly supernational. The need to fit these different national realities to the emerging disjunctural ethnoscapes and to tune them to the new trans-national cultural-setting, has become the main challenge for European countries. Implementing a European dimension in the curricula, by promoting programmes of international mobil-ity and valuing their implications in terms of lifelong learning, is the necessary response to the emerging trans-national European society, which is based more and more on the production and consumption of knowledge and information and continuously in need of updating its know-how. Educational priorities are increasingly dependent on such a changing social context. In fact, according to Delors (1996), the treasure hidden within the educational system of the XXIst century is strongly linked to the multifaceted social fabric in which the individual is bound. The increased mobility of individuals entails both a quantitative and qualitative change of social capital as it provides new ties that, being weak and provisory, demand a diffused trust combined with a high level of toler-ance towards unfamiliar situations (Granowetter, 1983). There is a link between weak

80 | Maria Giovanna Onorati

ties, education and trust, and trust is, of course, part of intercultural competency. As pointed out by Hellivell and Putnam, (2007) education increases tolerance and social trust; that is why it can be a powerful lever in the development of a diversified social capital. In turn, the nature of social capital, owing to its informal and diversified compo-nents, influences successful education (Putnam, 2004: 357-369). This means that educa-tion and social capital are positively correlated to each other, especially “bridging” social capital that, by creating ties which pass through different social layers, proves to be particularly adequate in coping with the increasing complexity of social situations and the changing relationships in current society. In fact “bridging social capital” requires skills that enable individuals to network within heterogeneous groups and to connect and become cooperative with people from a different life background (Putnam, 2004: 20-22). Of course the nature of these ties is fragile, but it is for exactly this reason that it is more outgroup-oriented and more likely to foster social inclusion, as well as cultural and scientific innovation (Granovetter, 1983: 214). In Granovetter’s words, bridging weak ties “are exactly the sort of ties that lead to complex role sets and the need for cognitive flexibility” (Granovetter, 1983: 204). From this perspective, contrary to the close, com-munitarian relationships underlying “bonding” social capital, the weak but diversified ties of “bridging” social capital prove to be more valuable as they foster opportunities for mobility and for a cultural updating of society.

5.2 Learning for life in a changing society

It is evident that the real treasure of our times is an educational model that is in itself a source of “bridging” social capital; that is a model able to enhance social skills, value the learning potential of disjunctural experiences owing to unfamiliar situations and develop outward-oriented gaze in individuals.

Developing intercultural competences is as much an educational matter as it is a sociological and an ethical one, as it is concerned with the relational level of the encounter with the different other. As a matter of fact, ICIC’s educational pathway is deeply rooted in a sociological perspective that helps grasp the effects of social capitals on learning, and vice versa create a learning strategy that affects and enriches learners’ social capitals.

As remarked by Scheler (1926), in late modern societies individuals and struc-tures change very quickly, so that disjunctural states are not a rare occurrence. These societies are characterized by the emergence of more artificial forms of knowledge as formal school education is no longer sufficient. Mannheim also pointed out that mod-ern society demands an educational model able to promote an a-dogmatic knowledge useful for life and highly focalized on how to cope with changes (Mannheim, 1952). As also later thematized by Bauman (2000, 2005) in the concept of “liquidity”, changing has become the cipher of our times, as a consequence of both the increased physical mobility of individuals from one place to another (migration is the most spectacular

Sociality as a Basic Dimension of Intercultural Competences | 81

form of this structural phenomenon) and the symbolic syncretism which derives from the worldwide reach of the media in the knowledge society. This fluidity of the social space, owing to both the changing composition of society and to the unprecedented access to symbolic universes created by the media, frequently induces states of disjunc-ture which question our taken-for-granted world of evidence on which we rely in our daily understanding of reality. When this change has to do with cultural or ethnical dif-ferences, the disjunctural effect may take the shape of a cultural shock, something that shakes the foundations of our identity, as it questions the “relatively natural conception of the world” (Schütz, 1976: 96).

In a society where “we are constantly having potential learning experience” (Jarvis, 2007: 5) especially because of the close link – up almost overlapping – between com-munication, socialization and education, the concept of learning exceeds the limits of formal education, and education can no longer be confined to institutionalised places and phases of an individual’s life (Jarvis, 2007: 138). That is why an educational project aimed at creating a new European cultural and educational framework of reference may only be full embedded within a holistic perspective, and strongly centred on expe-rience meant as a source for knowledge. Education should in fact offer learning oppor-tunities to individuals on a recurrent basis throughout their lifespan, through forms of de-institutionalised learning, incorporated into the ordinary processes of everyday life through innovative/transformative forms of knowledge acquisition (Jarvis 2005: 123). Transformative learning is a cognitive process that starts from a feeling of disjuncture in our world of evidence and, through a process of integration of the unknown ele-ments in our mindsets, ends with a new, changed taken-for-granted world. In Illeris’ words, transformative learning occurs:

‘[...] as the result of a crisis-like situation caused by challenges experienced as urgent and una-voidable, making it necessary to change oneself in order to move on‘ (Illeris, 2009: 91)

5.3 The ethical and sociological facet of intercultural education: understanding the encounter with the other

A society in which boundaries of nationhood and statehood have been transcended has to endow itself with an educational project that is sociologically founded; that is to say able to keep abreast with the rapidity of changes (competitivenes) and to respond with an effective approach to “unfamiliar” issues arising from the clash of differences (inclusion). So lifelong learning as a transformative/innovative kind of know-how to cope with rapid social changes on the one side, and intercultural education as a way to develop a competent and ethical approach to differences on the other, become insepa-rable priorities of an educational model capable of meeting the need for competitive-ness and inclusion in our societies. The instrumental assumption of culture as respon-dent to pragmatic functions of social and communicative activities (Augé, 1992), the


emphasis on the dynamic processes rather than on the rigid structures that underpin cultures (Bourdieu, 1979) and a dialogic sociality relying upon plural identity ( Abdallah – Pretceille, 1999: 17) are the core operational concepts of such an educational model. The need to go beyond passive coexistence of cultures, as promoted by multicultural education, demands an educational policy responsive to the specific educational needs of all minorities, that is able to develop a sustainable way of living together in multi-cultural societies by promoting understanding, respect and dialogue between the dif-ferent cultural groups. Such a qualitative advance in education, also recommended by UNESCO Guidelines on Intercultural Education (2006), traces the sociological design of a European “reflexive cosmopolitism” wished for by Beck and Grande, which was meant as the capacity to “tune and balance the different ways to keep in touch with the extraneous and the other” (Beck and Grande, 2006: 31).

Such a qualitative jump in education requires a shift from multiculturalism (an approach descriptive of the culturally diverse nature of human societies and aimed at acknowledgement) to interculturality, a dynamic concept which refers to evolving rela-tions between cultural groups and aimed at “the existence and equitable interaction of diverse cultures and the possibility of generating shared cultural expressions through dialogue and mutual respect” (UNESCO Guidelines 2006). Interculturality presupposes multiculturalism but paves the way to a critical, reflective approach to one’s own and other’s culture based on exchange and dialogue on a local, regional, national or inter-national level. The intercultural approach makes interaction fundamental: it focuses on subjective cultures, as being focalized on understanding the dynamics underpinning the actual encounter with the different other, instead of understanding the culture of the other (Abdallah – Pretceille, 1999: 57-58). Such a centrality of the relation raises the intercultural approach in education onto a social and ethical axis that demands a holistic approach to learning and competence, centred on human relationship and on a multidisciplinary methodology strongly oriented towards the social pole of learning and ethically grounded:

‘La réfl exion éthique débouche sur une interrogation identitaire qui concerne tout le monde et pas uniquement les autres, les étrangers, les immigrés. Elle repose sur une activité com-municationelleIl s’agit autant d’un travail sur soi qu’un travail avec autrui. Ce ne sont pas les actes qui fondent l’éthique, mais au contraire, l’accord sur les valeurs qui fondent la validité des actes, accord qui repose sur l’élaboration d’un consensus élaboré dans la communication et dans la discussion’ (Abdallah – Pretceille, 1999 : 71)

Ethical reflection provokes a questioning of identity by a process that relies on a communicational activity, that involves the self as well as the other, and that brings values into question. Intercultural work is therefore an ethical process that demands an agreement on values that can only be based on an agreement developed through the social acting par excellence, that is communication and discussion (Habermas, 1981; Apel, 1988).


5.4 The social grounding of ICIC’s learning strategies

To face the needs of an ever-changing society, people must learn to cope with the inevitable disjuncture that affects knowledge at every level, from the taken-for-granted assumptions on which common sense presumes, to the most elaborate sym-bolic universes underpinning values, ideologies and norms of behaviour. Hence the unprecedented link between lifelong learning, bridging social capital and intercultural competences that has become the basis for the development of any key trasformative/creative competence owing to the encounter between subjective cultures involved in any professional ambit.

Hence also the assumption of intercultural competence as a culturally-aware mobi-lization of knowledge, skills, attitudes and values, that enables people to cope with the unfamiliar and ever changing problems arising (in work as in life) from the encounter with people socialized in a different culture, with a view to finding new and shared solu-tions (Bednarz – Onorati, 2010). Intercultural competency is assumed as know-how that provides every learner with the cultural knowledge, attitudes and skills necessary to manage the disjuncture from familiar experiences that characterizes learning processes in our complex societies and finally to achieve active and full participation in complex society (Part II, Chapter 6).

The Intensive Programme Interdisciplinary Course on Intercultural Competences (ICIC) has as a merit the testing of an educational pathway in which developing inclu-sive and non-discriminatory attitudes is an integral part of a programme of study actu-ally based on cooperation at a trans-national level. Such a purpose demands con-crete training and development of communicative and social skills, as participants of different nationalities are put into situations such as living together and sharing spaces, learning processes and educational goals, so that throughout the programme they informally reproduce and directly experience their object of study. It is a learning situation that necessarily demands the activation of social and collaborative skills in the span of professional competences.

Being an intensive programme concentrated in limited space and time, and focused on well-defined educational objectives, ICIC creates an ad hoc learning situation that brings to life to an extraordinary sociological laboratory in which complex relational and learning dynamics are at stake. Set in one of the partner countries, the ICIC pro-gram creates a learning situation in which the gap between the mode of interaction demanded by that situation and the one usually associated with similar experiences provokes an odd feeling that Jarvis calls “sensation of disjuncture” (Jarvis, 2009: 30 and 105), a sort of cognitive dissonance that questions one’s own taken-for-granted world and activates a process of coping with unfamiliar situations that is at the core of transformative learning (Illeris, 2005, pp. 94-95).

The intensive part of this module was conceived as an experience to “transfer to practice” the first online inputs of discussion within a multicultural space, characterized by a unique combination of formal and informal learning. Within such a situation, semi-structured inter-group interaction plays a central role in the activation of intercultural


dynamics, which along with reflection is crucial in the process of shifting from a situation of mere multiculturality to an intercultural one. To create an intercultural learning situa-tion means to arise the conscious experience of cultural disjuncture through a reflective re-working that develops a mindset capable of integration (see infra Part II, Chapter 6).

The convergence between learning, communication and socialization, remarkable for the learning potential underpinning miscommunication in both formal and informal situations of exposure to cultural differences, is at the basis of the innovative methodol-ogy developed within the ICIC programme. The experience of difference and its break-ing down into often closed and communitarian mindsets (mainly relying upon bonding social ties) has been a lever in intercultural transformative learning. In this case bridg-ing social experience means not simply living together with people speaking different languages and having different backgrounds, but also interacting and exchanging infor-mation through work in international and inter-professional subgroups and reflective reworking of the inevitable disjuncture which arises both from full immersion in a foreign country and from interaction with foreign colleagues. These bridging factors in the learning path have been crucial in the shift from a descriptive approach to the expe-rience of diversity to the axiological understanding of values as discursive “constructs” whereof cultures and individuals “make themselves up” (Bennett, 1993).

5.5 Bridging social capital and intercultural sensitivity

This course brings into play the different social backgrounds of individuals and cre-ates the conditions for shifting from an ethnocentric to an ethnorelative attitude, neces-sary in the development of intercultural competences. According to the Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity created by Bennett (2002), intercultural sensitivity unfolds along a continuum of attitudes towards cultural differences ranging from eth-nocentric stages (negation, defense, minimization) to ethnorelative ones (acceptance, adaptation, integration). This model acts as a framework to explain the observed and reported experiences of people in intercultural situations and to offer a model for pre-dicting possible ways of confronting cultural differences.

‘In general, the ethnocentric stages can be seen as ways of avoiding cultural difference, either by denying its existence, by raising defences against it or by minimizing its importance. The ethnorelative stages are ways of seeking cultural difference, either by accepting its importance, by adapting a perspective to take it into account, or by integrating the whole concept into a defi nition of identity’ (Landis – Bennett – Bennett (eds.), 2004: 153)

The ethnorelative stages are characterized by non conformistic, non anxious, self-critical, de-centralized and aware attitudes towards one’s own and others’ cultures. In Bennett’s framework the passage from one stage to another is marked by the cognitive shift to representations that are not anchored very much to stereotypes, but rather


grounded upon contextual and experiential evaluation of situations. By using the clas-sical definition of social representations (Farr – Moscovici, 1989), we can say that in the process of the objectification of experiences, to be precise in the integration of unfa-miliar elements within familiar figurative schemes, ethnorelative mindsets draw rather on the periphery, that is on the “situationally unstable side” of representations which largely rely upon direct experience, rather than on the core, that is the stable “figurative nucleus” which relies largely upon stereotypes (Farr – Moscovici, 1989: 61).

Development of Intercultural Sensitivity

Experience of difference

Ethnocentricstages

Ethnorelativestages

Denial Defence Minimization Acceptance Adaptation Integration

Figure 1. Bennett’s Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity (DMIS).

(Landis – Bennett – Bennett, 2004: 153)

The methodology used in this programme is a triangulation between the dimen-sions primarly involved in the learning process (Illeris, 2009: 87-88); knowledge was activated by providing a conceptual framework about intercultural principles, incen-tive by prompting motivation and emotions and sociality by inter-group interaction, communication and cooperation. The importance that we attached to the social pole opened up a learning pathway that enabled the participants to develop the expected competences through situations anchored in real life, that is to the periphery of social representations. The holistic approach to intercultural competences, and to communi-cation skills as their crucial component, was realized through the diversification of the learning activities, which passed through different disciplinary approaches and meth-odologies, all connected by a strong anchorage to the relational experience in which the individual is continuously involved with different degrees of proximity, from the intra-psychic relations to inter-institutional ones, up to mass communication (Cheli, 2004). The holistic understanding of competence resulted in an interdisciplinary approach to competence, with a marked tendency in the different methodologies to value the anchorage to social practice and, in general, the informal experience of exposure to the other which underpins each individuals understanding of difference.


PsychosocialCooperative learning

Cultural shockRole plays

Pedagogic

Experential learningCritical incident

Case studyProblem solving

SociologicNeighbourhood exploration

Interviews with privileged witnessesMedia education

AnthropologicParticipant observation

Video shotsPhotos

Ambit Method

Figure 2. ICIC’s multidisciplinary approach.

In the construction of the educational pathway we made social-skills crucial; in fact we created learning activities which are interactive in nature, require appropriate timing and reciprocity of specific behaviours and entail effective, appropriate initiations and responses. These activities maximise social reinforcement from others, thanks to coop-eration strategies that avail of both verbal and non-verbal (body) communication.

All learning activities from formal, (keynotes, workshops, group-work, presentations in plenum) to non formal (field visits, neighbourhood exploration, guided discussions in informal places) and to informal (actual immersion in the context) were thought up for enhancing social skills as basic operational components of any intercultural compe-tency; that is of a social competency applied to a particular situation. Social skills refer to interaction at an interpersonal level, but if trained with people from a different cul-tural background, they can provide the “social sensitivity” necessary to break down any prejudice-based approach to difference. As has been amply demonstrated, social skills are primarily acquired through learning (Hargie – Saunders – Dickson, 1994; Argyle, 1997). Therefore, it is important to assess individuals’ social competency to carry out a learning program focusing wholly on the eminently social ability to cope with differ-ence. This is what we tried to do by profiling students’ social capital whilst checking their tolerance towards ambiguous or openly unfamiliar situations (what we did with the “self-exploration” assignment in the online part) and by sounding them out on their day-


by-day experiences (reflective diary) or at defined intervals (focus groups) by checking understanding of some course activities closely related to social-skills.

Training in non-verbal (body) communication was achieved by frequently resorting to simulation, both through intercultural games (Rafa-Rafa, Yellowland-Blueland and The desert island, see chapter 1.7), and through role plays of problem solving applied to a case study. Simulation proved to be very effective in assessing and enhancing social skills, as it puts the whole body, both through motory abilities and perception, at the centre of social interaction (Argyle 1997: 107). By fostering inter-action, these activities make the body a social territory directly involved in the relationship with the other, while group-work and mixing-up enhance flexibility by putting the person in someone else’s shoes and, consequently, enhance empathy.

Both structured and semi-structured activities found their grounding and consolida-tion in non-structured situations of socializing with difference (staying abroad, cohabi-tation, leisure activities) that acted as powerful occasions for informal learning. The coexistence of these dimensions, formal, non formal and informal, was assumed to be necessary for the development of intercultural competences at every level, as students were involved in a learning process not only as professionals but also as individuals. This strategy facilitated the acquisition of flexible, adaptive worldview configurations, typical of intercultural sensitivity, as it brought learners’ subjective cultures and the reign of evi-dences (e.g. social representations and practices) they presume on into play.

5.6 Social capital and subjective cultures in intercultural sensitivity

The learning situation created by the course takes the shape of a “situational social occasion”; that is a situation in which the grouping of individuals and their interper-sonal interaction is strictly dependent on the social structure and the communicative conditions prevailing in it (Goffman, 1971: 19-24). The peculiarity of this situation is that it creates a problematic field of interaction in which the usual practical reasonings of common sense and the related order of interaction with its bonding moral standards, are completely undermined. In that situation all participants, even the autochthonous ones, are “strangers” as the basic assumptions underlying “thinking-as-usual” cease, and the cultural pattern no longer functions as a system of tested recipes at hand (Schütz, 1976: 95-96).

As it is a programme that directly questions the participants’ social capital, during the intensive activities we used different techniques that allowed us to assess stu-dents social competency and to understand the impact of the social dimension on stu-dents’ intercultural awareness. We provided both quantitative and qualitative survey instruments (see Part III), aimed at checking and mapping students’ “positioning” in the inevitable “cultural clash” arising from full immersion in a multicultural setting, their involvement in the activities and their attitude towards the whole course. To that


purpose, we submitted a questionnaire that checked participants’ level of satisfaction with the many different dimensions of this program. The survey showed the impor-tance assumed by the students’ backgrounds in their evaluations, especially in learn-ing dimensions which were sensitive from an intercultural point of view and which account for their subjective cultures and their underpinning “thinking-as-usual”. The participants’ background, meant both as received formal education (academic, voca-tional) and as “bridging” or “bonding” social capital (amount, duration and reasons of experiences abroad, networks including foreign people, etc....) proved to be a cluster-ing factor (see Part III) and to influence students’ perception of the program’s relevance for their future profession (p<0.001), its capacity to value informal learning (p<0.001) and to provide opportunities for networking (p<0.001). This analysis enables us to understand to what extent factors concerned with social background and with life in general, may speed up or hinder the development of intercultural competency and which of these factors should be eventually valued when planning a learning pathway aimed at developing competences that claim to be “lifelong”.

In order to better understand the importance of social background in the development of intercultural competency, we also used qualitative tools, such as reflective diaries (see Part II, Chapter 2), that provided an immediate and day-by-day insight into students’ understanding of this experience. In the second edition in Turkey, we also created two focus groups of seven students, in order to increase the importance of subjective cul-tures, social capitals and personal biographies in the relevance attached by students to the social dimension of the learning path and to social skills. As difference is not only a matter of culture and language, but also of personal life stories, the participants were selected not only according to their different nationalities and educational profiles (so that all involved countries and institutions were represented), but also according to their different biographies, in order to make the group as heterogeneous as possible. Moreo-ver, focus groups reproduced the problematic order of interaction created by the course. Created at the beginning and at the end of the course, they highlighted the weight of the social axis in the learning process, owing both to the students’ starting backgrounds and to full immersion in a foreign country (Turkey), and finally to cohabitation with people of different nationalities as demanded by the intensive formula of the programme.

Though all students perceived the informal situation of socializing with difference as crucial for developing intercultural competency, their educational background, both formal and informal (e.g. social), played a role in their different intercultural entry- exit sensitivity. It is evident from the focus group that students with relevant experiences abroad and used to contact with foreign people – something which we assumed as basic factors of “bridging” social capital – are more endowed with critical insight into the cultural shock they inevitably undergo in a complex social situation such as the one created in the intensive program. They also prove to be more capable of making non-polarized comparisons between their own countries and the one in which the Intensive Program takes place, a feature indicative of an ethnorelative attitude.

Such differences confirmed what emerged in the clustering of students’ opinions about the course. Four groups emerge from the cluster analysis (see infra, Part III,


Chapter 2) that are crossed by two main factors: kind of education (university/voca-tional education) and nature of the social capital in their background. Some clusters are also notable for the prevalence of certain nationalities (group 4 mainly Finnish, group 2 mainly Italian and Turkish), but the national datum is a consequence of the educational traditions and lifestyles of the countries involved. In Finland students are very used to travelling abroad; it is highly encouraged by their educational system, as travelling is felt to be a part of their personal growth as individuals. This is not as com-mon in the Mediterranean cultures which are less centred on the individual’s needs.

It is evident that what is at stake in this course, and what we tried to explore in this sociological deepening, is students’ subjective cultures; that is the “cultural group’s characteristic way of perceiving its social environment” (Triandis, 1972: 3) and their influence upon the mobilization of resources for activating skills and competences. According to Triandis, differences in subjective culture are responsible for a good deal of intergroup conflict: understanding these differences and the way in which they influ-ence people’s mutual behaviours can provide critical information about intercultural dynamics and improve mutual understanding, communication and adjustment (Tri-andis, 1973: 7 and follow.). These interviews helped us to check the different subjective cultures involved in this field of interaction and to thereby perceive a shift in students intercultural sensitivity by sounding out their initial expectations for the course, as well as their reactions about the above mentioned social factors implied in the learn-ing process. We sounded out expectations, evaluations, beliefs and attitudes as basic subjective expressions of values working within any culture, convinced that building competence is a process involving not only behaviours, but also values.

5.7 Expectations and motivation: practical reasonings of common sense in play

Sounding out the incentive component and expectations for this learning experience allowed us to trace back the cultural patterns and the social world that underlie students’ “subjective cultures”, which are anyway no longer trustworthy in the muti-cultural situ-ation created by the intensive programme. In fact, in a situation in which the taken-for-granted scheme of interpretations underpinning the “relatively natural concept of the world” is questioned (Scheler in Schütz, 1976: 121), this exploration of expectations serves to probe participants’ level of rigidity regarding social representation of others.

The motives and expectations declared by the intervieewed mainly rely upon the wish to socialize and meet people from a different culture, something that we can refor-mulate in terms of curiosity for bridging social capital felt as a means for social and cultural empowerment:

‘I wanted to meet new people from other cultures, I wanted to get new experiences and thought that this course would help me to open my mind’ (Gabriella - Hungary);


‘[...] to meet new people, improve my skills, to know more about different cultures’ (Irene – Italy);

‘I joined the programme because I wanted to know about a new culture and religious dif-ferences. I expected to meet new people to speak with and to get more insight into a new culture. I imagined we would have group trips and lots of talks with different people’ (Sara - Belgium)

Curiosity is the first incentive to communication and, according to Bennett’s model, it should be the affective quality of acceptance (Bennett, 1993). But curiosity is not a neutral factor; it is on the contrary rich with cultural and social context, as is proved by its being highly differentiated in students’ expectations, thus marking different ethno-relative attitudes. Indeed curiosity is underpinned by different representations of the other, which account both for cultural and biographic background. As also proved by the clustering effect of the different social capitals, students’ expectations and curiosity about the course are strongly affected by the emotional side implied in this learning experience, and the affective quality underlying their expectations disposes them dif-ferently towards the clash with difference. We know that emotion is the individual’s dimension concerned both with values to which he/she has been socialized to and with meaningful and involving experiences, so that the different expectations account for a subjective positioning in an ideal scale of intercultural sensitivity and, to some extent, a different echoing of the indirectly involved objective cultures.

Generic curiosity towards a different culture and networking is the main incentive, especially in those students who had never been abroad before, or if they had it had been for a very short time, as was so in the three cases quoted above, where students had no experience at all or experiences not longer than three months. In most cases this curiosity relies upon representations drawn from the media and public discourses, than on social practices. This is particularly evident in those students who identify a “different culture” with a “different religion”; a distortion rich with with the ideological polarization at the basis of conflict between civilisations. By the way, we must admit that, to differing extents according to one’s biography, none of the participants on the Program (including teaching staff) was completely free of this polarized view of West-ern/Christian and Eastern/Islamic culture which divides the whole world. Also in this analysis we could not avoid to notice a sort of underpinning demarcation line between Turkish and non-Turkish students as something mirroring the belonging to the Islamic and non-Islamic world.

The curiosity towards Turkey and this learning experience expressed by non-Turkish students is not much defensive but nonetheless quite polarized and largely (etero)-directed by media and public discourses. Non-Turkish students’ acceptance of difference highlights a disposition to behavioural relativism (a very early ethnorelativ-istic attitude), characterized by sketchy, often stereotyped information about the other culture, explored, and in many cases accepted, as an expression of different ways of behaving, but not dealt with in depth as an expression of different, and often contrast-ing values.


‘I imagined I would fi nd a more closed country but I was positively surprised by local people. As for the course, I expected to fi nd what I found, because I had already taken part in a similar experience’ (Irene - Italy).

‘[...] A woman feels safer than imagined here’ (Sara - Belgium)

The overlap between interest in cultural diversity and a generic interest in Islam, with a consequent reduction of culture to its religious features, betrays a poor knowl-edge not only of the other culture, but also of one’s own culture; something that espe-cially emerges in those students who had never had direct experience of the Islamic world. These students fell into the trap of a doubly wrong generalization: that of con-sidering 1). Islam as an undifferentiated reality and 2). Turkey as a country marked by those stereotyped and polarized representations of Islam circulating in the West. In these cases diversity is accepted, but the assumption of this diversity is rooted in the so-called conflict of civilizations. As suggested by Bennett (1993), the developmental task we planned to support these students aims at refining the analysis of cultural con-trasts by acquiring categories for deepening and elaborating cultural contrasts during interaction, in order to better tolerate ambiguity and enhance cultural self-awareness. And as a matter of fact, at the end of the intensive course these students show an increased tolerance of ambiguity, as is proved by the fact that the “very big issue” (Sara – Belgium) of speaking in another language with consequent misunderstandings, is considered a challenge at the end of the course, as shown by these words:

‘I agree with her [Sara] because sometimes it’s not natural, like when you speak in your own language, so when you have to translate into English it is not clear for the others... this was really challenging’ (Irene – Italy)

The curiosity of a Turkish student participating in the focus group sounds more “defensive”. In this case, along with the above mentioned motives for getting in touch with other cultures, there is also the will to disprove the stereotypes about Turkey cir-culating in EU countries.

‘Outside of Turkey there are a lot of prejudices against Turkey. I wanted to explain that it is not so. My purpose is to communicate with other people; it motivates me, I wanted to understand the people from other countries, to improve my English [...]’ (Zehra – Turkey)

This defensive attitude affected the interaction, and distorted mutual understand-ing; in fact the need for going more in depth with analysis during the visits moved non-Turkish students to ask “inconvenient” questions, was sometimes felt by Turkish students as evidence of prejudice:

‘I’m aware that some different nationalities have lots of prejudices about Islam. In this presenta-tion it [a lecture given by a Turkish expert on Islam] was clearly explained and questions were an-swered. Some students asked us some questions. But I know that people’s viewpoint still didn’t change. But it is a different religion, so people may be mixed [confused]’ (Zehra – Turkey)


In this case, the different mode of acceptance betrays an affective quality that is not simply a polarized attitude arising from the conflict of civilizations, but a defensive position located on the ethnocentric stage, ranging between defence and minimiza-tion. In this attitude we recognize an effort to defend one’s own identity – conceived only in the conflicting terms “we/them” – through the paradoxical strategy of break-ing down the prejudice ascribed to the others. It is evident that this statement oozes a nationalistic public rhetoric, whose tones have probably been sharpened by the dispute on the controversial entry of Turkey to the European Union. Such a defensive attitude provokes strong anxiety in the participants which in turn affects the interaction, and, as we know, absence of anxiety is a positive factor that contributes to social competency and supports the performance (Argyle, 1997: 106):

‘[...] We all were very anxious; no one slept the day before. Languages are so different, we are very surprise, the, other students are so kind, so friendly, they want to communicate with Turkish people’ (Zehra - Turkey)

As suggested by Bennett (1993), the most suitable developmental task for moving forward from this starting position was to stress mediation and team-building by pro-moting cooperative activities, and the continuous mixing-up of participants for group work that fosters transfer of skills in different situations. This strategy enhanced stu-dents’ awareness and the shift towards a relativistic position within their own culture, as proved by the same Turkish student’s reflections, written in her diary at the end of the pathway:

‘The subjects are very interesting and diffi cult. We divided again into different groups, so I met everybody. Female circumcision is a very diffi cult topic. I had heard about it before but i don’t have any idea about this topic, so we discussed it and did some research. [...] we used keywords, brainstorming... it is a different experience. The nationalities are very different and also their points of view [...] I improved, especially my language problems! I communicated with lots of nationalities. I learned the other peoples’ point of view. I can compare my opinions’ (Zehra - Turkey)

Different objective cultures and different personal biographies resound in the curi-osity of those students who had already had meaningful experiences of mobility, such as study abroad, migration or personal contacts with the host Country (clus-ters 1 and 4). In these students, already endowed with non-bonding social capitals because of their biographies, the expectations for the experience in Turkey reveal an attitude that is already positioned on the side of adaptation, and even integration. The behavioural relativism underlying their expectations already fits into the frame-work of a temporary adhesion to the other’s values in an empathic effort, if not to adapt to them because of the short duration of the stay, then at least to understand them in depth.

From the very beginning, those students with a background of a long stay abroad or migration showed a “realistic” interest focused on profession and specifically oriented


to the place they are going to visit. As is also evident in the cluster analysis, they have an enhanced evaluative and reflective capability; in fact from the beginning they conceived this learning experience not only as an occasion for getting in touch with another culture, but also as an opportunity to go into their own culture in more depth. The subjective dynamics they undergo during the course represents a presupposition for overcoming a polarized assumption of ethnic difference (national/non national) underpinning any national culture (see Sayad, 2002). These students show an initial mindset towards difference which is indicative of an intercultural sensitivity that other students achieve only at the end of the course. Take the example of the expectations expressed by a Finnish student who lived in Turkey for one year:

‘I imagined we would go a little bit deeper into Turkish habits and religion and daily life mat-ters. Maybe it will come later or not!’ (Minna-Maria - Finland)

To these students, with relevant mobility abroad, this course is an occasion for exchanging life-experiences, in which not only their knowledge or their culture, but their own biographies are at stake. They prove to be very aware of the lifelong (in the whole sense of the word) learning value behind this social and educational experience. For instance, an Italian student who had just come back from an ERASMUS experience said:

‘[...] we started to share our lives, something about experience in the past [...] learning from people is better than learning from books’ (Giulia - Italy).

Elena, a Lithuanian girl that moved to Finland for studying, says:

‘I wanted to exchange my life experience. I am an immigrant too and I wanted to understand if I have prejudices and stereotypes about other people’ (Elena, Lithuanian immigrated to Finland)

In these students, the emotional entailment of the experience is mitigated by their previous background, so their attention is more devoted to the professional benefits implied in their exposure to another cultural context; something that is felt as an occa-sion for personal growth that may also enrich them on a professional level. In fact Giulia says that her main interest consists in improving professional skills (that is) to learn more about intercultural competences, while Alice, a Swiss girl studying in Canada says: I was curious about the project, I thought it might be useful for my future profession as a translator as I could do translations in an intercultural setting. And once again the Lithuanian student:

‘I wanted to learn to communicate with different people and wanted to work with foreigners [...] I expected to experience changes and new abilities’ (Elena – Lithuanian immigrated to Finland)


Finally the Finnish girl who lived in Turkey:

‘I wanted to have contact with students from other countries and wanted to learn different methods to learn and teach. I wanted to see what it is like to work and learn in other countries’ (Minna-Maria - Finland)

5.8 Misunderstandings: between miscommunication and intercultural challenge

The communicative situation created by the course gave rise to a problematic situa-tion in which misunderstandings arising in every communicative context are sharpened by the fact that all participants did not share the same cultural frames and hardly ever achieved a point of agreement. Students, without any or with a short direct experience of difference, prove to be less tolerant towards ambiguity and tend to emphasize the impedimental effects of misunderstandings on group communication. On the contrary, students with significant experiences of mobility abroad show lower anxiety towards speaking in a foreign language, which has positive effects on the group-work perform-ance and learning processes in general. Of course the latter students are, in most cases, also the ones with better linguistic skills, while their relaxed attitude towards misun-derstandings moved them to perceive this problematic functioning of thinking-as-usual as a positive disjuncture to activate a more effective process of cooperation, also relying on non-verbal strategies, so that at the end diversity acted as a reinforcement for their communicative and social skills (Hargie – Saunders – Dickson, 1994):

‘[...] even though we are not speaking in our mother tongue, we all try to express ourselves as simply as we can and we all try... may be we can draw when we don’t know how to say a word also... but as you said it’s your background that is different’ (Giulia – Italy)

Although linguistic gaps delayed the communicative exchange, the real problem was not language as such, but different cultural assumptions underlying words. Ambi-guity is a matter of meanings, not of words, and this was clear, especially in those “bridging” students, who approached the encounter with subjective cultures provided by this intercultural experience, as a unique occasion for exchanging learning, as well as for starting a critical reflection on objective culture and going beyond the polarized we/them perspective, as is clear in these words:

‘I have to say, that today I had a really very rich conversation with one Turkish student from the school where we were having this visit. He was explaining tome, because we have different kinds of view, for example what the word “immigrant” means. So it was nice to hear from him how he explained the word to me; it was totally different from the way I had expected the word “immigrant”. It was really nice to exchange opinions about politics and this kind of things...


also opening to the people of the East and many other painful things they have in this country. It was really really rich’ (Minna-Maria - Finland).

Misunderstanding becomes the pretext for a critical crossing of the objective cul-ture. Students able to put themselves in a marginal position in the peer group interac-tion are also those who can best value interdisciplinarity as a methodology developed in this program:

‘I learnt a lot of things because we worked in fi elds that are different from mine so I was really interested in getting knowledge about these new fi elds’ (Irene – Italy)

As also demonstrated by their belonging to the clusters which are more endowed with a rich social curriculum, these students are characterized by a learning profile open to role flexibility and to renewing their cognitive schemes through the disjunctural experience of the difference. This condition, indicative of an ethnorelative sensitivity already positioned between adaptation and integration, becomes particularly evident in the interviews conducted during the conclusive focus group at the end of the path. They show reflexive and more flexible understanding, especially of those communica-tive and linguistic gaps, that are felt as a huge problem by other students.

Miscommunication becomes to them an occasion for meta-communicative reflec-tion upon the social asset underpinning language; what Bennett calls a “metaphrase”, that is a phrase that explains other phrases by making plain the cultural frames under-lying meanings and their effects on behaviours (Bennett, 2002: 55):

‘I think we have different ways of sharing information or of holding information (metaphrase) because coming from a Western European country means that we are used to analysing things with a critical thinking, and coming here I discovered that maybe for Turkish people it is differ-ent; maybe they don’t like to talk about the bad things that happened in their country’ (Alice - Swiss student attending University in Canada)

‘I learnt that there are many different opinions, many different points of views, it can be so different from yours, for instance, when we did the exercise “Who’s that man?” The opinions were so different...someone thought that he was a teacher, someone else that he was an artist...’ (Elena, Lithuanian immigrated to Finland)

5.9 Changing composition of groups and constructive marginality

All learning activities were conducted in small groups that changed every time a new activity started. Difficulties in communication and cultural shock arising from the mixing up of students were felt, especially by less anxious students, as an occasion for empowerment. Working in small, ever-changing groups is a challenge that compels


individuals to continuously renegotiate their roles and finally to remain in a marginal position in peer group interaction. In the end, this condition that tests social skills to the maximum, was perceived as a competence in itself that would allow participants to enhance their role flexibility.

‘I learnt a lot about myself, but I also learnt a lot about how it is to work in a group [...] I worked in the sixth group and I felt it gave me power; I should say it gave us power’ (Orsolia - Hungary)

‘It would be useful to us to mix up again and to know each other more and to get closer because it’s a small group... you open, we’re not afraid to talk, we can say our opinions and respect each other’ (Elena - Lithuanian immigrated to Finland)

‘I think that maybe we can change the group for the next task and it would be better, because we can know more people. Of course it would be easier to stay in the same group because we already know the people, but it is also good to change’ (Giulia - Italy)

Acknowledging the learning potential of mixing-up the groups accounts for a mind-set capable of a relational and contextualized knowledge; that is the ability to act in different contexts by building communicative and relational bridges starting from a self-reflective position (Castiglioni, 2005: 75). Such a capability to build constructive marginality, meant not simply as a professional skill but also as a personal attitude to think about identity in a more flexible way, is one of the core educational goals of the ICIC’s design, as a consequence of its holistic approach to intercultural competency:

‘I hope to improve my professional skills (that is) to learn more about intercultural competen-ces from people [...] learning from people is better than learning from books’ (Giulia - Italy)

‘[...] Moreover, I’m now more aware of cultural diversity and that there’s no wrong and there’s no right; it depends on the culture you grew up in’ (Irene - Italy)

Apart from the experience of cohabitation abroad with people from different coun-tries, ICIC allows students to avail of a cultural climate strongly oriented to developing intercultural ethics, based on the capability to thematize, contextualize and, to an extent, systematize experience in terms of knowledge, thanks to critical and self-critical reflective processes. Almost all of those in the second focus group looked back at their own country with new eyes, especially those students who had already started at a high ethno-relative stage. They showed a wider evaluative perspective; neither too critical, as would be in the case of positive discrimination typical of a newly gained ethnorelativism, nor too indulgent as would be in the case of feedback polarization owing to the clash with a highly “defensive” reality. These students look back at their biographies as migrants, or members of ethnic minorities and show a constructive atti-tude towards their personal experience as “marginal subjects”:


‘I’m from a minority in Finland; I belong to Sami, a people from the North. Before I was not so aware, but after this experience [...] I’m more aware of what the country did to this minority; I now understand what it means that I couldn’t learn my native language at school. Now I am more proud to be from this minority [...] so I learnt something about my own country, my own culture’ (Minna-Maria - Finland);

‘After this experience I think I have a better opinion of Finland, about the social system, be-cause I am also an immigrant in Finland, so I think that Finland has better opportunities for im-migrants [...] but I also have to say that in my country there should be improved relationships among people; it is important to care for each other and communicate with people’ (Elena - Lithuanian immigrated to Finalnd).

5.10 Experiencing the city as a weaving of human relationships

One of the key methodologies used in this course to develop intercultural competences was the exploration of the multicultural areas of the host town, including visits to special organizations (see infra, Part II, Chapter 4). This exercise, largely based on the urban sociology developed by Chicago School and on the ethnographic tradition developed by social anthropology, is an attempt to enhance the experiential side of this learning path-way by letting students mingle with diversity and with its related problems, such as integration, segregation and poverty. In the wake of Park (1925) and the Chicago School, this exploration is also an empirical effort to provide students with a sort of cognitive map of the social changes determined in neighborhoods by the ever changing composition of societies, owing to individuals’ increased mobility, especially in Western towns.

Transfer to practice was one of the core activities through which the holistic assump-tion of intercultural competency, based on the complete involvement of the individual with his/her environment, was particularly focused. In fact this methodology is a good example of the multidisciplinary approach of this course. The neighbourhood explora-tion used ethnographic fieldwork techniques of gathering information, such as partici-pant observation, interviews with privileged witnesses, video recordings and photo-graphs, which are typically used by social anthropology and qualitative sociology. The further reworking of this empirical experience in terms of knowledge and competence is largely based on techniques derived from experiential pedagogy such as cultural shock, critical accidents, cooperative learning used in pair work and group discussions and reflective practices of verbalization and espoused practices aimed at systematizing and mapping the learning experience.

By walking across multiethnic neighborhoods, collecting information through inter-views with ordinary people or with privileged witnesses during the visits to the local organizations (schools, social services, hospitals, cultural associations), students could fully immerse themselves in the host town and experience it, in the wake of Park, no longer as an abstract object or a congeries of individuals and social conveniences, but


as a “state of mind”, “a body of customs” and “of the organized attitudes and senti-ments that inhere in these customs” (Park, 1925: 1-2), as in these words:

‘Visit to “African house” in Matonge was nice, we heard some history and about the special-ity of the area from the girls that worked there [...] I think that the most important aspect of the visit was the locals point of view about Matonge’ (Pinja – Finland, from her Refl ective Diary)

Students could witness migration through the changing shape that proximity and neighborly contact with migrants conveys in towns. They could directly observe seg-regation and integration by going through the places where the signs are evident and look into the ways people and institutions cooperate. At the end of their exploration, they had to schematize this experience by creating a map of their route that would be handed over to another group, so that they could get to know other areas/aspects of the city following in the footsteps of their colleagues. This activity of selecting to create a map and retracing of the exploration according to a rational pathway allowed students not only to strengthen their perception of the town as a “live place” by retracing the feelings it provoked, but also to train their comparative skills by attaching sociological relevance and meanings (e.g. social gaps, inequalities) to these contrasting feelings:

‘You can’t ignore the gap between the African quarter and the magnifi cent main streets of the central part. It seems like being in two different worlds which co-exist. Today I had the oppor-tunity to know this quarter from another point of view, that of its inhabitants’ (Imma – Italy)

‘We had lunch in a social structure, a place where poor and old people go to spend their time and to eat. I’ve never had a meal in a similar place... it was a new and a strong experience to me. I’ve seen poverty and solidarity from close up. It was so strange thinking that places in the same neighborhood, separated by a few meters of distance, could have different situations of life; near to situations of well being (expensive restaurants, expensive tourist places, etc...) you could fi nd also situations completely opposite. Brussels is not only what it seems’ (An-narita – Italy)

They could enhance their intercultural skills, by observing and assessing urban policies from below and from within.

‘[...] I noticed that Brussels has a different face behind its shining and diplomatic aspect. We met lots of people from all over the world. Some of them had good intentions to talk with us, some others not. I also learned that the way of approaching a person is also important’ (Ertan - Turkey)

‘Visit to “La Rose”, “Cosmos”, “KureghemNet”. Discussion with the staff of Cosmos about the risks in Kureghem neighborhoods [...] Illegal activities going on. People express their frustra-tion through violence. They feel their neighborhood is abandoned by the government’ (Jay – Finland)


‘To explore an area presented by another group has been interesting, we discovered that there are many different ways of life in Brussels. In fact with 65% foreigners, Brussels represents a challenge in Europe’ (Eric – Cameroon/Switzerland)

‘In the morning we went to an organization called KureghemNet. It’s a place with lots of com-puters and media equipment, where old people and immigrants of Kuregem can learn internet and other computer skills. I think that they have a very good way to approach the problems of integration that this area has, by arranging some projects for old people and immigrants together. They have done short movies and interviews together. The results have been good’ (Elina - Finland)

‘Shadia and I visited a couple of youth organizations and got a pile of statistics about Malen-beek, good to have some research based into. Afternoon went fast when we had to put the pieces together’ (Emmi - Finland)

In general all of the students joined in these activities with great enthusiasm, even though also in this case students with a richer social capital in their backgrounds were more active and participative, and proved to be capable of more reflexive and less emo-tional evaluations and reactions to the feeling of estrangement inevitably caused by the cultural shock they received:

‘[...] Matonge was a whole new experience, very multi-cultural I think and for me, at one point, I was the only white person aroud in a shopping centre and that was a new experience. It gave a new point of view to being an outsider, being stared at and not knowing whether you are accepted or not [...] I think in Matonge I saw a new world, both in a physical and mental way it made me look at things differently: myself, my culture, the normality, the diversity, the complexity’ (Pinja - Finland).

Estrangement as a condition of cultural decentralization also concerned native stu-dents. After the exploration the city looked different to them as well, so they were able to make comparisons and understand better the contradictions of big towns in terms of social inequities:

‘It was hard and sometimes frustrating, because I’m from Gent but I couldn’t speak my own language in my own country!’ (Lynn – Belgium)

By coming into direct contact with the basic organization of social life that is the neighborhood and by visiting to the organizations, witnessing local interests and local sentiments embodied by associations, students could asses local people’s level of par-ticipation in city life and, by forming an idea of the local policies on integration, grasp in the neighborhood the basis of political control.

‘First exploration in Matonge, multicultural area with so many black African people. They have built a kind of African way of life in Matonge. The diversity in Matonge is touchable [...] In Matonge everybody can feel proud to be as a foreigner in this diversity.’ (Eric – Cameroon/Switzerland)


‘The area that we had to explore according to the others’ guideline was the city centre. They made a map with numbers and when we arrived at a number we had to open an envelope with the same number and do the task indicated on it. The fi rst place that we had to visit was a refugee camp, the second was a church where people who don’t have citizenship live despite the fact that they have been here for a long time. This was a shock for me, I had never seen a place like this before [...] It was so interesting how different the same city can be. Matonge is like a town in the city with its own rules while in the city centre rules are more controlled.’ (Katalin -Hungary)

This activity helped students to enhance their critical thinking even though not eve-ryone considered the issue so profoundly, such as recognizing a moral attitude towards a physical organization of the urban spaces. Some of them, once again those students who had never had experiences outside their home countries, remained at the level of emotional reaction to the shocking clash with a very different reality. [....]

‘[...] our exercise was to explore the centrum, that is the tourist part but we also found some really interesting immigration part. Next to the centrum you can fi nd many people from Africa, etc.... Sometimes it was a little scary for us, so I just put my camera in my backpack. [...] I think this is a really good thing to explore the city and not just see the tourist sights. You see deeply and you can see the reality’ (Zsuzsanna - Hungary)

‘Today we visited the social centre where they help people with different problems [...] Then we had lunch in the homeless canteen, it was a very striking experience for me’ (Vittoria – Italy)

‘Nice experience (visiting Matonge), but I didn’t like that they left us alone, probably because I’m not used to that kind of experience. In the region where I live you cannot fi nd neghbor-hoods where only extra-communitarian or only African people live, like here. So the fact of fi nding myself alone in a situation like this made me feel quite uneasy’ (Mahera - Italy)

It is clear to what extent these reflections made by students echoe Park’s belief that these studies might “enable us to read the newspaper intelligently” (Park, 1925: 3). I would rather say that such an experience enables us to read the reality in which we live intelligently. The life representations spread by the media, both fascinating and shock-ing, have such an influence on the average person, because in most cases people know so little about that represented reality. Such an experience of fieldwork can therefore work as a source for collecting material, objective information, that can offer a new angle for looking back at our own reality and reflecting on it.

‘I was surprised to see my friends so melancholic after the visit, because I think I am used to worse in my country. The negative conditions have already passivied my refl ection’ (Ediz – Turkey)

‘We visited the Anderleekt area. During the visit to the centre for young people I wondered how it would be possible to implement such an activty in Ticino. This has been useful in order to look at the differences between this area and Ticino. I realized that even in an area like this,


to let an organization work, you have to accept compromises [...] This aspect made me refl ect about my strict way of making choices, especially about work, where power relationships be-tween demand and offer are not properly equal’ (Alan - Switzerland)

5.11 Conclusion: Learning to be a professional in a multicultural society

After this long overview on the weight that the social background has on the learn-ing process, we can no doubt say that an educational pathway like ICIC may start a process of gap-filling and fine-tuning between the different educational traditions of the involved countries, and pave the way to a European know-how, composed of a set of life skills necessary for different professions, especially the ones centred on a direct relationship with people.

What clearly emerges from this analysis is that in the perspective of full achieve-ment of expected outputs by all involved students, the nature of starting social capitals can affect learning processes by making students more or less interculturally sensitive and open to unfamiliar factors of disjuncture. At the end of this learning experience all students showed a definite shift in their intercultural sensitivity. As in the case of the different types of initial curiosity animating their incentive to take part in the programme, different kinds of ethnorelative sensitivity emerged in the final “learning budgeting”.

In fact, the intervieews clearly show that the inevitable clash with stereotypes underpinning every encounter with another culture may breed different achievements in developing ethnorelative attitudes. The clash with stereotypes turns into a self-criti-cal attitude and constructive marginality, up to flexible identity in those students with a meaningful experience of cultural shock in their background. On the contrary, in those students starting with non-bridging or hardly bridging social capitals, intercultural competency achieved the level of the ethnorelative acceptance of difference, sometimes supported by positive discrimination, without thrusting their evaluative skills to the level of open self-criticism. These differences are partly owing to different biographical experience, and partly, or mostly, to the different educational systems.

This experience confronts us with evidence that cannot be ignored any more and that should become a priority of the educational systems and cultural policies of any European country: Multicultural societies are the reality of our times, so a mono-cultural approach to diversity with the consequent removal of differences in more or less open forms of segregation, or any other kind of rejection, is no longer possible nor realistic. The multi-ethnic, multicultural changing society in which we live needs new educational models more and more centred on the social axis of learning experi-ences and on mobility as a condition for widening and diversifying one’s own social experiences. Of course mobility, though fostering encounters with difference, is not an educational strategy in itself unless it is underpinned by an educational design that


aims at developing cultural awareness, reflective attitudes and socio-cultural sensitive-ness. This is possible only with an educational approach open to the epistemological contribution which comes from the social sciences, and that inevitably implies valuing the social axis of learning through developing a sociological sensitivity, thus contribut-ing to make learning “life wide” (Jarvis: 2007). Valuing social axis means anchoring knowledge to the analysis of the contexts in which the learning process takes place, and acknowledging the learning implications of some informal situations of socializa-tion by integrating them into well structured, formal educational pathways.

In an epoch of recurrent education, skills concerned with special professional ambits may be developed effectively, only if integrated with life skills, such as problem solv-ing, creativity, critical thinking, effective and appropriate communication, social and collaborative abilities, self-awareness, empathy, management of emotions and stress, but above all management of disjunctural experiences; something that is the cipher of our times and, as remarked by Jarvis, has an enormous learning potential (Jarvis 2009). This is what we tried to achieve by grounding ICIC’s educational pathway on a holistic approach, but it is only possible if national objective cultures also rethink themselves in the reflexive terms wished for by Beck and Grande by systematically encouraging self-awareness and self-criticism through circulating social representations.

I would conclude this contribution by reporting an exemple from the concluding discussion of the second focus group, which gives evidence of the different kinds of outcome intercultural sensitivity achieved by students:

‘I learnt about other religions, for example the Catholic religion, the Jewish religion and I had no idea before this experience [...] Turkey is such a different place because the Eastern part and Western part are very different, so this is a big problem because people from other countries think that generally people use scarves like this, children don’t go to school, so the general idea I have is that there are not true ideas about Turkey[...] I didn’t have any stereotypes before so...’ (Zehra - Turkey)

‘Now I can see what Turkish could be like, but it was very different when I arrived here, be-cause it is very different from migrants at home [Turkish people living in Belgium], the people here are different, the cultures are different, the Islam is different, everything is different about [....] I always thought that my culture is very open minded, we have no pejudice, we are very open, but now I know it is not so...’ (Sara - Belgium)

‘I learnt that in order to understand the other, we need to be aware of our own culture and values. I also learnt that I might be afraid of what I don’t now and I also have prejudices con-cerning the things I don’t know’ (Nina - Finland)

‘I learnt a lot of things because we worked in fi elds that are different from mine [...] moreover now I’m more aware of cultural diversity and that there’s no wrong and there’s no right, it depends on the culture you grew up in’ (Irene - Italy)

‘... Yes, but every country has its taboos’ (Minna-Maria - Finland)

References

Abdallah-Pretceille M. – Porcher L., Ethique de la diversité et education, PUF, Paris 1998.Abdallah-Pretceille M., L’ éducation interculturelle, PUF, Paris, 1999.Abrams. R. (ed.), The meaningful learning forum, Meaningful Learning Research Group, Santa

Cruz (CA), 1996, 1.Adda J., La mondialisation de l’économie. Genèse et problèmes, La Découverte, Paris, 1996.Aerts H. – Görgöz R., Intercultureel werken in het maatschappelijke werk, Unpublished course at

the Arteveldehogeschool, opleiding sociaal werk, 2004.Allen J.-L., Long K. M. - O’Mara J.- Judd B.B., Verbal and nonverbal orientation towards com-

munication and the development of intra-cultural and intercultural relationships, in: Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 2003, 32 (3): 129-160.

Allport W.G., The nature of prejudice, Addison Wesley, Cambridge (MA), 1954, It. trans. La natu-ra del pregiudizio, La Nuova Italia, Firenze, 1976.

Alsina M. R., Intercultural communication: context, fi eld and practice, In: Rigotti E. – Rocci A. (eds.) Studies in Communication Sciences, Università della Svizzera italiana, Lugano, 2003: 163-174.

Anderson B., Imagined communities, Verso, London - New York,1983.Anderson J., The architecture of cognition, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), 1982.Apel K-O., Diskurs und Verantwortung. Das problem des Übergangs zur postkonventionellen Mor-

al, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, 1988.Appadurai A., Modernity at large: cultural dimensions of globalization, University of Minnesota

Press, Minneapolis-London, 1996, Modernità in polvere, Meltemi, Roma, 2001.Argyle M., Les competences sociales, in Moscovici S. (ed.), Psychologie sociale des relations à

altrui, Nathan, Paris, 1994: 87-118, It. trans. Le competenze sociali, in Moscovici S. (ed.), La relazione con l’altro, Raffaello Cortina, Milano, 1997: 105-142.

Argyris C. – Schön D., Organizational learning II: Theory, method and practice, Addison Wesley, Reading (MA), 1996, Apprendimento organizzativo: teoria, metodo e pratiche, Guerini e As-sociati, Milano, 1998.

Argyris, C. – Schön, D., Theory in practice. Increasing professional effectiveness, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1974.

Augé M., Pour une antropologie des mondes contemporains, Aubier, Paris, 1994.Augé M., Non-lieux: introduction a une anthropologie de la surmodernite, Editions du Seuil, Paris,

1992, Engl. trans. Non-places. Introduction to an anthropology of supermodernity, Verso, Lon-don - New York, 2006.

Ausubel D.P., The Psychology of meaningful verbal learning, Grune & Stratton, New York,1963.

288 | References

Baron J.B. – Sternberg R.J., Teaching thinking skills: theory and practice, Freeman & Co., New York, 1987.

Barth F. (ed.), Ethnic groups and boundaries: the social organization of culture difference, Univ-eritetsforlaget, Oslo, 1982.

Baudrillard J., La societé de consommation: ses mythes et ses structures SGPP, Paris, 1970, It. trans., La società dei consumi. I suoi miti e la sue strutture, il Mulino, Bologna 1976.

Baudrillard J., Simulacre et simulation, Galilée, Paris, 1991.Bauman Z., Community. Seeking Safety in an Insecure World, Polity Press, Cambridge, 2001, It.

trans. Voglia di comunità, Laterza, Roma-Bari, 2001.Bauman Z., Globalization. The human consequences, Polity Press - Blackwell, Cambridge-Oxford,

1998, It. trans. Dentro la globalizzazione. Le conseguenze sulle persone, Laterza, Roma-Bari, 2001.

Baumann G., The multicultural riddle. Rethinking national, ethnic and religious identities, Rout-ledge, New York- London, 1999.

Beck U., Risikgesellschaft. Auf dem Weg in eine andere Moderne, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, 1998, Engl. trans. The risk society: Towards a new modernity, Sage, London, 1992.

Beck U. – Grande E., Das kosmopolitische Europa. Gesellschaft und Politik in der Zweiten Mod-erne, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, 2004, It. trans. L’Europa cosmopolita, Carocci, Roma, 2006.

Bednarz F. – Onorati M.G., Learning to become an intercultural practitioner, in Journal of US-China Education Review, David Publishing, Libertsville (Ill.), 2010, 7 (5).

Behrens M. – Weber Guisan S. – Mottas C.L. (eds.), La qualité dans la formation et l’enseignement, comment la défi nir, comment l’évaluer? Proceedings of the International Congress ADMEE - SSRE Suisse, Lausanne, 5-7 September 2002.

Bennett M.J., Principi di comunicazione interculturale, Franco Angeli, Milano, 2002.Bennett M.J., Towards a developmental model of intercultural sensitivity, in R. Michael Paige

(ed.), Education for the intercultural experience, Intercultural Press, Yarmouth (ME), 1993.Berger P. – Luckmann T., The social construction of reality, Anchor Books, New York, 1966, It.

trans., La realtà come costruzione sociale, il Mulino, Bologna, 1969.Bernegger G. – Comi G., Ripensare tempi, spazi e relazioni di apprendimento, In: Merlini F. (ed.),

Nuove tecnologie e nuove sensibilità. Comunicazione, identità, formazione, Franco Angeli, Milano, 2007.

Bloom B. S., Taxonomy of educational objectves; the classifi cation of educational goals, Longmans Green, New York, 1956.

Boas F., The methods of Ethnology, in: American Anthropologist, 1920, 22 (4): 311-321.Bolton G., Refl ective practice. Writing and professional development, Sage, London, 2005.Bonoli L., La conoscenza interculturale. Una reazione all’inadeguatezza delle nostre aspettative

di senso, in: Merlini F. – Boldrini E., Identità e alterità. 13 esercizi di comprensione, Franco Angeli, Milano, 2006.

Bonoli L. – Ghisla G. – Loi M. (eds), Economia della formazione professionale, De Agostini, No-vara, 2008.

Boud D. – Cohen R. – Walker D. (eds), Using experience for learning, SRHE & Open University Press, Buckingam (UK), 2000.

Boud D. – Cohen R. – Walker D. (eds.), Refl ection. Turning experience into learning, Kogan Page, London, 1985.

Bourdieu P., La distinction: critique sociale du jugement, Les Editions de Minuit, Paris, 1979.Bourdieu P., Le sense pratique, Les Editions de Minuit, Paris, 1994.Bourdieu P., Language and symbolic power, Cambridge, Polity Press, 1991.Boyle T., Design for multimedia learning, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (NJ), 1997.Bronckart J-P. – Gather Thurler M., Transformer l’école, De Boeck, Bruxelles, 2004.

References | 289

Brubaker R. – Cooper F., Beyond identity. In: Theory and society, 2000, 29: 1-47.Bruner E. M., Experience and its expressions, in: Turner V. – Bruner E. M. (eds.), The anthropology

of experience, University of Illinois Press, Chicago, 1986.Bruner J., Acts of meaning, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), 1990, It. trans., La ricerca

del signifi cato, Bollati Boringhieri, Torino 1992.Bruner J., Actual minds, possible worlds, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA)-London,

1986, It. trans., La mente a più dimensioni, Laterza, Roma-Bari 2005.Bruner J., The culture of education, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), 1996, It. trans.,

La cultura dell’educazione, Feltrinelli, Milano 1997.Bruner J., Going beyond the information given, Norton, New York,1973.Buchler J., What is a discussion?, in The Journal of General Education, 1954, 8 (October).Butler M. B. – Lee S. – Tippins D.J., Case-based methodology as an instructional strategy for

understanding diversity: Preservice teachers perception, in Multicultural Education, 2006, 13 (3): 20-26.

Buzan T., The history of memory techniques leading to mind maps - history of mind maps, Paper-back BBC Active, London, 2003.

Buzan T. – Buzan B., The mind map book - radiant thinking, the major evolution in human thought, BBC Books, London, 1993.

Callwood L.J., Interprofessional learning among health professionals. Learning to work collabora-tively, Lancaster University, Department of Educational Research, Lancaster (UK), 2006.

Camilleri C. – Cohen-Emerique M., Chocs de cultures. Théories et enjeux pratiques de l’interculturel, L’Harmattan, Paris, 1989.

Cardinet J., L’évaluation en classe: mesure ou dialogue?, IRDP, Neuchâtel, 1986.Carter K., Using cases to frame mentori-novice conversations about teaching. In Theory into Prac-

tise, 1988, 27: 214-222.Casetti F., Tra me e te. Strategie di coinvolgimento dello spettatore nei programmi della neotelevi-

sione, Rai Vpt, Torino, 1988.Cassano F., Pensiero meridiano, Laterza, Roma-Bari, 1996.Castiglioni I., La comunicazione interculturale: competenze e pratiche, Carocci, Roma, 2005.Cattaneo A. – Comi G. (eds.), Didattica della videoconferenza. Un manuale operativo, Carocci,

Roma, 2009.Catteeuw P. – Coutuer M., Een portfolio voor interculturele competenties. Zoektocht naar een ref-

erentiekader interculturele communicatie, in Mores, 2005, 6 (3): 15-20.Cheli E., Teorie e tecniche della comunicazione interpersonale, Franco Angeli, Milano, 2004.Chiozzi P., L’antropologia culturale, Le Monnier, Firenze, 1980.Clifford J., On ethnographic authority. In: Representations, 1983, 2: 118-146.Cohen A. P., Culture as identity: An anthropologist’s view. In: New Literary History. A Journal of

Theory and Interpretation, 1993, 24 (1): 195-209.Cohen-Emerique M., L’approche interculturelle, une prévention à l’exclusion, in Les Cahiers de

l’ACTIF, Dossier Interculturel en travail Social, 250-251, mars-avr. 1997: 19-29.Cohen-Emerique M., La négociation interculturelle, phase essentielle de l’intégration des migrants,

in Hommes et Migrations, 1208, juillet-août 1997: 9-23.Cohen-Emerique M., Le modèle individualiste de sujet. Ecran à la compréhension des personnes

issues de sociétés non-occidentales, in Cahiers de sociologie économique et culturelle, 1990, 13: 9-34.

Comi G. - Bonoli L., L’interculturalità nella formazione. Quale ruolo per un istituto di formazione dei formatori?, Cohep, Berna, Giornata di studio sulla Pedagogia dell’interculturalità, 2009: 1-2.

Comi G., (ed.) Chercher pour agir, A.I.R.H.M., Mendrisio, 1993: 106 – 121.Corrao S., Il Focus Group, Franco Angeli, Milano, 2000.

290 | References

Coulby D., Intercultural education: Theory and practice. In: Intercultural Education, 2006, 17 (3): 245-257.

d’Ovidio F. - Onorati M.G., Esplorazione dei paradigmi latenti di interculturalità in Valle d’Aosta tramite modelli con equazioni strutturali In: Annali del Dipartimento di Scienze Statistiche “Carlo Cecchi”, Università degli Studi di Bari, Vol. VII, CLEUP, Padova, 2008: 93-114.

De Angelis K., Bignami, F. (eds.) Formazione professionale modulare. Esempi di buone pratiche in Europa, Instytut Technologii Eksploatacji, Radomiu, 2007.

De Bartolomeis F., La ricerca come antipedagogia, Feltrinelli, Milano, 1969.

De Decker F. - Vyt A., Research on the impact of internationalisation on the higher education cur-ricula (in Flanders), University College Arteveldehogeschool, Ghent, 2002.

De Decker F., From I-3 education to I-3 Health Care, Celebration of 10-year International course on Health Care Issues, Bruges, 2007.

De Decker F., I-3 modules. (Internal document University College Arteveldehogeschool, Ghent), 2004.

De Greve M. – Dejonckheere F., Outcome competences International Course on Intercultural com-petences (ICIC), 2004, www.icic.be.

De Kerckhove D., Brainframes, technology, mind and business, Bosch & Keuning, Utrecht, 1991.

Dejonckheere F. – Oztürk C., Developing interprofessional and intercultural competences of allied health and nursing students. Unpublished paper presented at the 1st European Transcultural Nurses’ Association (ETNA) International Conference, Conference CD, 4-6 June 2008, Izmir, Turkey.

Dejonckheere F. – van der Hulst H., Manual international course on health care issues, University College Arteveldehogeschool, Ghent, 1998.

Dejonckheere F., Interdisciplinary course on health care issues, paper presented at the Celebration of 10-year International course on Health Care Issues, Bruges, 2007.

Dejonckheere F., Bridging the different professions within health care, social work and education. NACNAH-Annual conference, New York (US), 2005.

Dejonckheere, F., Clientgericht werken en diversiteit in theorie en praktijk, 2006, in: Kinébanian A. – Le Granse M., Grondslagen van de ergotherapie, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2006.

Dejonckheere F., International Course on Intercultural Competences (ICIC), ASAHP-Annual con-ference, Tampa, US, 2006.

Dejonckheere F., Manual international course on health care issues, University College Artevelde-hogeschool, Ghent, 2004.

Delors J. (ed.), Learning: The treasure within, Report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the Twenty-fi rst Century, UNESCO Publishing, 1996, available in: http://www.unesco.org/delors/.

Demorgon J. – Lipiansky M., L’interculturel en formation, Retz, Paris, 1998.

Demorgon J. – Ludemann O., Pour le développement d’une compétence interculturelle en Europe. Quelles formations? Quelles sanctions qualifi antes? Ofaj, Paris,1996.

Deraeck G., Culturen in meervoud. Aspecten van intercultureel (ped)agogisch handelen in onder-wijs, vormingswerk en hulpverlening, Kritak, Daman, 2003.

Di Nallo E. – Guidicini G. – La Rosa M. (Eds.), Identità e appartenenza nella società della globaliz-zazione, Franco Angeli, Milano, 2004.

Doise, W. - Palmonari A. L’étude des représentations sociales, Delachaux & Niestlé, Neuchâtel, 1986.

Dominelli L., Anti-racist social work. A challenge for white practitioners and educators, Mac-millan, London, 1988.

Donnan H. – Wilson M.T., Nation, state and identity at international borders, in: Donnan H. – Wilson T. (eds.), Border identities. Nation and the state at international frontiers, Cambridge University Press, 1998: 1-31.

References | 291

Erskine J.A. – Leenders M. – Michiel R. – Mauffette-Leenders L., Teaching with cases, Ivey Pub-lishing, Richard Ivey School of Business, The University of Western Ontario, London - Can-ada, 1998.

Farr R. – Moscovici S. (eds.), Social representations, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1984, It. trans. Rappresentazioni sociali, il Mulino, Bologna, 1989.

Farra H., The refl ective thought process: John Dewey revisited, in The Journal of Creative Behav-iour, 1998, 22 (1): 1-8.

Feischmidt M., Multikulturalizmus: kultúra, identitás és politika új diskurzusa. In: Feischmidt M. (eds.), Multikulturalizmus, Osiris, Budapest, 1997: 7-29.

Ferguson R., Representing ‘race’, Arnold, London, 1998.Festinger L., A theory of cognitive dissonance, Stanford University Press, Stanford, 1957.Foucault M., Of other spaces. In: Diacritics – a review of contemporary criticism, 1986, 16 (1):

22-27.Fry H.. – Ketteridge S. - Marshall S., A handbook for teaching and learning in Higher Education,

Kogan Page, Glasgow, 1999.Furbert C. - Hickie J. - Lee K. - McLoughli A. - Boggis C. - Sutton A. - CookeS. - Wakefi eld A.,

Interprofessional education in a midwifery curriculum:the learning through the exploration of the professional task project (LEAPT), in: Midwifery, 2004, 20: 358-366.

Gadamer H-G., Wahrheit und Methode, Gesammelte Werke, 1, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, 1990.Gans H. J., Symbolic ethnicity in America. In: Ethnic and Racial Studies, Routledge, Philadelphia,

1979, 2(1):1-20.Gardner H., Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences, Basic Books, New York 1983, It.

trans. Formae mentis. Saggio sulla pluralità della intelligenza, Feltrinelli, Milano 1987.Gather Thurles M., Innover au coeur de l’établissement scolaire, ESF, Issy-les-Moulineaux, 2000.Geertz C., The interpretation of cultures, Basic Books, New York, 2000.Giaccardi C., La comunicazione interculturale, il Mulino, Bologna, 2005.Giaccardi G. – Magatti M., L’io globale. Dinamiche della socialità contemporanea, Laterza, Roma-

Bari, 2003.Gibbs G., Learning by doing. A guide to teaching and learning methods, Further Education Unit,

London, 1988.Giddens A., Modernity and self-identity. Self and society in the late modern age, Polity Press,

Cambridge, 1991.Goffman E., Frame Analysis. An essay on the organization of experience, Harvard University

Press, Cambridge (MA), 1974.Goffman E., Behavior in public places: Notes on the social organization of gatherings, Free press of

Glencoe, New York, 1963, It. trans. Il comportamento in pubblico, Einaudi, Torino, 1971.Goleman D., Social intelligence: The new science of human relationships, Bantam Books, New

York, 2006, It. trans. L’intelligenza sociale, Rizzoli, Milano, 2006.Görgöz R., Intercutureel werken, Arteveldehogeschool, opleiding sociaal werk, Unpublished

course, 2005.Görgöz R., Gemeenschapsvorming en Diversiteit. De Dr. Jeckyll & Mr. Hyde of de Bert & Ernie van

het hedendaagse samenleven? In: Cockx F. - De Vriendt J., (eds.), ‘Ne zanger is een groep’: over gemeenschapsvorming, Socius, WisselWERK Cahier, 2006: 70-85.

Görgöz R., Culturele antropologie, Arteveldehogeschool, opleiding sociaal werk, Unpublished course, 2009.

Görgöz R. – Dierckx Ch., Diversiteitsvraagstukken, Arteveldehogeschool, opleiding sociaal werk, Unpublished course, 2008.

Granovetter M., The strength of weak ties: A network theory revisited, in Sociological Theory, 1983, 1: 201-233.

Grondin J., Sources of Hermeneutics, State University of New York Press, Albany, 1995.

292 | References

Habermas J., Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns: Handlungsrationalität und gesellschaftliche Rationalisierung, Bd. 1, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, 1981, It. trans., Teoria dell’agire comu-nicativo: Razionalità nell’azione e razionalizzazione sociale, Vol. 1, il Mulino, Bologna 1986.

Hall E.T., The silent language, Doubleday, New York, 1959.

Hall E.T., The hidden dimension, Anchor Books, New York, 1966, it. trans. La dimensione nas-costa, Bompiani, Milano, 2001.

Hall S., Encoding and decoding in television discourse, in Hall S.- Hobson d. – Lowe a. – Willis P. (eds.), Culture, media, language: working papers in cultural studies, 1972-79, Hutchinson, London, 1980.

Hall S., Our mongrel selves. In: New Statements and Society., Suppl. 19th of June 1992: 6-8.

Hall S., The question of cultural identity. In: Hall S. – Held D. – McGrew T., Modernity and its Futures, Open University Press, Cambridge, 1992: 596-634.

Hall S., Raising intercultural awareness in preparation for periods of residence abroad. A review of current practice in UKHE, University of Central Lancaster, Lancaster, Unpublished paper, August, 1999.

Haloburdo E.P. – Thompson M.A., A comparison of international learning experiences for bacca-laureate nursing students: Developed and developing countries, in Journal of Nursing Educa-tion, 1998, 37: 13-21.

Hancock P., Refl ective practice – using a learning journal. In Nursing Standard, 1998, 13: 37-40.

Hargie O. – Saunders C. – Dickson D., Social skills in interpersonal communication, Routledge, London, 1994.

Harrison L. – Malone K., A study abroad experience in Guatemala: learning fi rst-hand about health, education, and social welfare in a low-resource country. In International Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship, 2004, 1 (1): 1-15.

Hatton N. – Smith D., Refl ection in teacher education - towards defi nition and implementation, Teaching and Teacher Education, 11 (1), 1995: 33 – 49.

Hawley D. – Richardson B., The case study session as a control system, in: Industrial and Com-mercial Training, 1995, 27 (6): 21-24.

Heidegger M., Phänomenologische Interpretation zu Aristoteles. In: Existentia, 6-7., suppl. II., 1996: 6-73.

Held D. – Mc Grew A., Globalization/anti-globalization, Polity Press, Cambridge (UK), 2002, It. trans., Globalismo e antiglobalismo, il Mulino, Bologna 2003.

Helliwell J.F. – Putnam R. D., Education and social capital, In Eastern Economic Journal, 2007, 33: 1-191, available in: http://college.holycross.edu/eej/Volume33/V33N1P1_19.pdf.

Heron J., Feeling and personhood: Psychology in another Key, Sage, London, 1992.

Herreid C.F., What makes a good case? Some basic rule for good storytelling help teacher generate students excitement in the classroom, in: Journal of College Science Teaching, Dec.1997/Jan. 1998: 163-165, now available in: http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/projects/cases/teaching/good-case.html.

Hoffman E., Interculturele gespreksvoering, Houten/Zaventem, Bohn Stafl eu Van Loghum, 2002 (fi rst edition 1994).

Hofstede G., Cultures and organisations: Software of the mind, McGraw-Hill, London, 1991.

Hofstede G., Allemaal andersdenkenden. Omgaan met cultuurverschillen, Contact, Amsterdam, 1991.

Hofstede G., Culture’s consequences, comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organisations across nations, Sage, Thousand Oaks (CA), 2001.

Hutchinson J. – Smith A. D. (ed.), Ethnicity, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1996.

Illeris K. (ed.), International perspectives on competence development, Routledge, London and New York, 2009.

Illeris K., A comprehensive understanding of human learning, in Jarvis P. – Parker S. (eds.), Hu-man Learning: a holistic approach, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 2005: 87-100.

References | 293

Illeris K., Laering, Roskilde University Press, Roskilde, 1999, Engl. trans. How we learn. Learning and non learning in school and beyond, Routledge, London - New York, 2007.

Jamme C., Gibt es eine Wissenschaft vom Menschen? Zur aktuellen Theoriedebatte zwischen Phi-losophie und Ethnologie. In: Därmann I.- Jamme C., Fremderfahrung und Repräsentation. Velbrück Wissenschaft, Weilerswist, 2002: 183-208.

Jarvis P., Learning to be an expert: competence, development and expertise, in K. Illeris (ed.), International perspectives on competence development, Routledge, London and New York, 2009: 99-110.

Jarvis P., Adult learning in the social context, Croom Helm, New York, 1987.Jarvis P., Globalisation, lifelong learning and the learning society. Sociological perspectives, 2nd

vol. of Jarvis P., Lifelong learning and learning society, Routledge, London, 2007.Jarvis P., Learning to be a person in society, Routledge, London and New York, 2009.Jarvis P., Parodoxes of learning: on becoming and individual in society, Jossey Bass, San Fran-

cisco, 1992.Jarvis P., Towards a comprehensive Theory of human learning, Routledge, London - New York,

2006.Jedlowski P., Un giorno dopo l’altro. La vita quotidiana tra esperienza e routine, il Mulino, Bolo-

gna, 2005.Jenkins R., Rethinking ethnicity, Sage, London, 1997.Johnson J.D. – Tuttle F., Problems in intercultural research, in: Gudykunst W. - Asante M. (eds.),

Handbook of International and Intercultural Communication, Sage, Newbury Park (CA), 1989.

Jonas H., Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Versuch einer Ethik für die technologische Zivilisation, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, 1984, It. trans., Il principio responsabilità, Einaudi, Torino 1993.

Jonassen D,H., Learning to solve problems. An institutional design guide, San Fransisco (CA), Wiley&Sons, 2004.

Jonassen D.H., Using cognitive tools to represent problem, in Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 2003, 35 (3): 262-380.

Jonassen D.H., Computers as mind tools for schools, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (NJ), 2000.

Jonassen D.H., – Peck K.L. - Wilson, B.G., Learning with technology, Merrill Publishing, Upper Saddle River (NJ), 1999.

Jorgensen P.S., Hvad er Kompetence? (What is competence?), in: Uddanelse, 9: 4-13.Kaern M., The bridge and the door by Georg Simmel., in: Qualitative Sociology, 1994, 4: 407-412 Karrus K., Ratkaise case, Otavan kirjapaino Oy, Keuruu, 2001.Kersten G. – Noronha S., Negotiation via the World Wide Web: A cross-cultural study of decision

making, in: Group Decision and Negotiation, 1999, 8: 251-279.Kinchin I.M., Using concept maps to reveal understanding. A two-tier analysis, in School Science

Review, 2000, 81 (296): 41-46.Koballa T.R., – Tippins D.J., Cases in middle and secondary science education: The promise and

dilemmas (2nd ed.) Upper Saddle River (NJ), Prentice Hall, 2003.Kolb D.A., Experiential learning: Experience as the source of Learning and Development, Prentice-

Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1984.Kolb D.A. – Osland J. – Rubin I., Organizational behavior: An experiential approach to human

behavior in organizations, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (NJ), 1995.Kovács É., Vakmerö tézisek az identitásról, in: Fedinec Csilla (szerk), Nemzet a társadalomban,

Teleki László Alapítvány, Budapest, 2004, 221-234, available in: http://szochalo.hu/uploads/media/kovacseva_vakmero_tezisek.pdf.

Kristeva J., Etrangers a nous-memes, Fayard, Paris, 1988, It. trans., Stranieri a se stessi, Feltrinelli, Milano 1990.

294 | References

Kuper A., Culture. The anthropologists’ account, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1999.Ladmiral J.R., La communication intercuturelle, Colin, Paris 1989.Landis D. – Bennett J.M. – Bennett M.J. (eds.), Handbook of intercultural training, Sage, London

– Thousand Oaks, 2004.Latouche S., L’occidentalisation du monde. Essai sur la signifi cation, la portée et les limites de

l’uniformisation planétaire, La Découverte, Paris, 1989, It. trans. L’occidentalizzazione del mondo. Saggio sul signifi cato, la portata e i limiti dell’uniformazione planetaria, Bollati Bor-ingheri, Torino 2002.

Lave J. – Wenger E., Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1991.

Le Boterf G., De la compétence a la navigation professionnelle, Editions de l’Organisation, Paris, 1997.

Lévinas E., Éthique et infi ni, Fayard, Paris, 1982, It. trans. Etica e infi nito. Il volto dell’altro come alterità etica e traccia dell’infi nito, Città Nuova, Roma, 1984.

Lewin K., Resolving social confl icts; selected papers on group dynamics, Harper & Row, New York, 1948, It. trans. I confl itti sociali, Franco Angeli, Milano, 1972.

Lin Ho C.M., Developing intercultural awareness and writing skills through email exchange, in The Internet TESL Journal, December 2000, 6 (12), available in: http://iteslj.org/Articles/Ho-Email.html.

Lindquist G.J., Programs that internationalize nursing curricula in baccalaureate schools of nurs-ing in the United States. In Journal of Professional Nursing, 1986, 2: 143-150.

Lindqvist S. – Duncan A. – Shepstone L. – Watts F. – Pearce S., Case-based learning in cross-pro-fessional groups-the development of a pre-registration interprofessional learningn programme, in Journal of Interprofessional Care, 2005, 19: 509-520.

Lugo A., Refl ections on border theory, culture and nation. In Michaelsen S. – Johnson D. E. (eds.), Border Theory – the limits of cultural politics, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 1997: 43-68.

Malinowski B., Argonauts of the Western Pacifi c, Routledge, London, 1932.Mannheim K., Diagnose unserer Ziet, Diagnose unserer Zeit: Gedanken eines Soziologen, Europa,

Frankfurt am Main, 1952.Marcus G.E. – Clifford, J. (eds.), Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Univer-

sity of California Press, Berkeley, 1986.Marcus G.E. – Fischer M. J.(eds.), Anthropology as cultural critique: An experimental moment in

the human sciences, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1986.Masoni V., Monitoraggio & valutazione dei progetti nelle organizzazioni pubbliche e private, Fran-

co Angeli, Milano, 1997.Masterman L., Theaching the media, Commedia Publishing Group – MK Media Press, London,

1985.McClure J.R. – Sonak B. – Suen H.K., Concept map assessment of classroom learning: Reliability,

validity & logistical practicality, in Journal of Research in Science Teaching, J. Randy McGinnis and Angelo Collins (eds.), 1999, 36 (4): 475-492.

Meyrowitz J., No sense of place. The impact of electronic media on social behavior, Oxford Uni-versity Press, York - Oxford 1986, It. trans., Oltre il senso del luogo. Come i media elettronici infl uenzano il comportamento sociale, Baskerville, Bologna 1995.

Mezirow J., Learning to think like an adult: Core conceptions of transformation theory, in Mezirow J. - Associates (eds), Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress, Jossey Bass, San Francisco, 2000.

Moon J., Learning journals and logs, refl ective diaries, in Good Practice in Teaching and Learning, Centre for Teaching and Learning, Dublin, 2003.

Moore G.T., Initiating problem-based learning at Harvard Medical School, In Boud D. – Feletti G. E, The challenge of problem-based learning, Kogan Page, London, 1997: 73-80.

References | 295

Morin E., Educare gli educatori. Una riforma del pensiero per la democrazia cognitiva, EdUP, Roma, 2002.

Morin E. – Motta R.D. – Ciurana E-R. (eds.), Éduquer pour l’ère planétaire. La pensée complexe comme méthode d’apprentissage dans l’erreur et l’incertitude humaine, Balland, Paris 2003, It. trans. Educare per l’era planetaria. Il pensiero complesso come metodo di apprendimento, Armando, Roma, 2004.

Morin E., La Méthode, l’humanité de l’humanité, tome 5: L’Identité humaine, Seuil, Paris, 2001, It. trans. L’identità umana, Raffaello Cortina, Milano, 2002.

Morin E., Les sept savoirs nécessaires à l’éducation du futur, Unesco-Seul, Parigi, 1999, It. trans. I sette saperi necessari all’educazione del futuro, It. trans. Raffaello Cortina, Milano, 2001.

Mortari L., Aver cura della vita della mente, La Nuova Italia, Firenze, 2002.

Moster M.P. – Kauffman J. M., Preparing teachers for special and general education through case-based instruction: An analysis of their perceptions, learning, and written cases, in Austral-asian Journal of Special Education, 16 (2), 1993: 40-47.

Neuhardt-Pritchett S. – Payne B.D. – Reiff J.C., (Eds)., Diverse perspectives on elmentary education:A casebook for critically analyzing issues of diversity, Allyn&Bacon, Needham Heights (MA), 2004.

Nicoll G., A three-tier system for assessing concept map links: a methodological study, in Interna-tional Journal of Science Education, 2001, 23 (8): 836-875.

Novak J.D. – Cañas A.J., The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct them, Techni-cal Report IHMC CmapTools 2006-01, Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition, 2006.

Novak J.D. – Gowin D.B., Learning how to learn, Cambridge University Press, New York, 1984.

Novak J.D. – Wandersee, J., Perspectives on Concept Mapping. Special issue of the Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1990, 27(10): 921-1075.

Novak J.D., Concept maps and vee diagrams: Two metacognitive tools for science and mathemat-ics education, in Instructional Science, 1990, 19: 29-52.

Novak J.D., Learning, creating and using knowledge: concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (NJ), 1998.

Onorati M.G., LLP- Intensive Programme Interdisciplinary Course on Intercultural Competences (ICIC). Unpublished Internal evaluation report Edition 2007-08, 2008.

Onorati M.G., LLP- Intensive Programme Interdisciplinary Course on Intercultural Competences (ICIC). Unpublished Internal evaluation report Edition 2008-09, 2009.

Oomkes F.R., Communicatieleer: een inleiding, Boom, Meppel, 1986.

Oztürk C., Educational strategies for developing intercultural competent networks and quality of services, Unpublished paper presented at the International Intercultural Conference 8-9 Octo-bre 2009, Modena, Italy, now available in the Conference CD.

Park R.E. – Burgess E. W. – Mckenzie R.D., The city. Suggestions for investigating of human be-havior in the urban environment, University of Chicago press, Chicago, 1925.

Perregaux C., Odyssea. Accoglienza e approcci interculturali, ed CDC, Bellinzona, 1996.

Perucca A., Educazione, sviluppo, intercultura, Pensa MultiMedia, Lecce 1998.

Perucca A., Il compito dell’educazione. Verso l’utopia dell’intercultura, in Quarta C. (ed.), Global-izzazione, giustizia, solidarietà, Dedalo, Bari 2004.

Perucca A., Mediazione culturale ed educazione universale in Pinto Minerva F. (ed.), La ricerca educativa tra pedagogia e didattica. Itinerari di Giacomo Cives, Progedit, Bari 2006.

Peschl M.F., Triple-loop learning as foundation for profound change, individual cultivation, and radical innovation. Construction processes beyond scientifi c and rational knowledge, in Con-structivist Foundations, Wien, 2007, 2(2-3): 136-145, available in: http://www.univie.ac.at/constructivism/journal/2/2-3/136.peschl.

296 | References

Pinto D., Intercultural communication. A three-step method for dealing with differences, Garant, Leuven, 2000.

Pinxten R. – Verstraete G., Cultuur en macht. Over identiteit en confl ict in een multiculturele wereld, Houtekiet, Antwerpen, 1998.

Putnam R., Bowling alone. The collapse and revival of American community, Touchstone- Simon & Schuster, New York, 2000, It. trans. Capitale sociale e individualismo, il Mulino, Bologna, 2004.

Rabinow, P. – Sullivan, W. M. (eds.), Interpretive social science. A reader, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1979.

Reggio P., Apprendimento esperienziale: fondamenti e didattiche, Università Cattolica – Diritto allo Studio, Milano, 2009.

Ricoeur P., Persona, comunità, istituzioni: dialettica tra giustizia e amore, E.C.P., San Domenico di Fiesole, 1994.

Rogers C., Freedom to learn, Charles E-Merrill, Columbus, 1969.Rogers C., On becoming a person, Houghton-Miffl in, Boston, 1961.Rogoff B., The cultural nature of human development, Oxford University Press, New York, 2003,

It. trans. La natura culturale dello sviluppo, Raffaello Cortina, Milano, 2004.Rokeach M., The open and closed mind, investigations into the nature of belief systems and per-

sonality systems, Basic Books, New York, 1960.Ryser C. - Alberti G. - Comi G. - Longhi, R., Persona, tecnica, organizzazione. La confi gurazione

dei sistemi lavorativi secondo la concezione MTO, Labor Transfer, Camorino, 2005.Sayad A., La double absence, Editions du Seuil, Paris 1999, It. trans. La doppia assenza, Raffaello

Cortina, Milano, 2002.Scanlan J.M. – Care W.D. – Udod S., Unravelling the unknowns of refl ection in classroom teach-

ing, in Journal of Advanced Nursing, 38 (2): 136-143.Scheler M., Die Wissensformen und die Gesellschaft: Probleme einer Soziologie des Wissens, Der

Neue-Geist, Leipzig, 1926.Schlick, C. – Comi G., Approaches to cultural awareness, Final report – Action Research in Parent-

ing in a multicultural european city project – Grundtvig 1 229977-CP-1-2006-1-UK-GRUNDT-VIG-G1PP, 2009.

Schön, D., The refl ective practitioner, Basic Books, New York, 1983, It. trans., Il professionista rifl essivo, Dedalo, Bari, 1993.

Schuringa L., Omgaan met diversiteit. Een uitdaging, H. Nelissen, Soest, 2001.Schütz A., Collected Papers. Studies in social theory, Vol. II, Martin Nijhoff, The Hague, 1976.Senge P., The fi fth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization, Doubleday, New

York, 1990.Senior B., Team performance: using repertory grid technique to gain a view from the inside, in

Journal of Managerial Psychology, 1996, 11(3): 26-32.Shadid W.A., Interculturele communicatieve competentie, in: Psychologie en Maatschappij, 24 (1),

2000: 5-14.Shaver P. (ed.), Self, situations and social behavior, Sage, Beverly Hills 1985.Silverstone R., Why study the media?, Sage, London, 1999, It. trans. Perchè studiare i media?, il

Mulino, Bologna, 2002.Simmel G., Bridge and door, in Frisby D. – Featherstone M., Simmel on Culture, Sage, London,

1997: 170-174.Singer P., One world: the ethics of globalization, Yale University Press, New Haven - London 2002,

It. trans. One World. L’etica della globalizzazione, Einaudi, Torino 2003.Soini H., Critical learning incident technique as a research method for studying student learning,

Paper presented at the Workshop Qualitative Research in Psychology, Blauberen (Germany), 20-22 October, 2000.

References | 297

Sorlin P., Sociologie du cinéma, Aubier Montaigne, Paris, 1977, Sociologia del cinema, Garzanti, Milano, 1979.

Srinivasan M. – Wilkes M. – Stevenson F. – Nguyen T. – Slavin S., Comparing problem-based learning with case-based learning: Effects of a major curricular shift at two institutions, in: Academic Medicine, January 2007, 82 (1):74-82.

Stoddart T. – Abrams R. – Gasper E. – Canaday D., Concept maps as assessment in science in-quiry learning- a report of methodology, in: International Journal of Science Education, 2000, 22(12): 1221-1246.

Stroobants H – Chambers P. – Clarke B. (eds.), Refl ective journeys. A fi eldbook for facilitating life-long learning in vocational education and training, Istituto Tagliacarne Roma – Acco Printer, Leuven, 2007.

Sulkanen L., Case-menetelmä ja sen vaikutus opettamiseen ja oppimiseen, Lahti University of Applied Sciences, Sarjat C, Artikkelikokoelmat, raportit ja muut ajankohtaiset julkaisut, Tam-pereen Yliopistopaino Oy, 2006.

Taguieff P.-A., Le racisme, Flammarion, Paris, 1997, It. trans. Il razzismo, Raffaello Cortina, Mila-no, 1998.

Taylor Ch., Philosophy and the human sciences, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985.Teraoka A. A., Is Culture to Us What Text is to Anthropology? In: The German Quarterly, 1989, 62

(2): 188-191.Thompson J.B., Critical hermeneutics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1981.Tilman F. – Ouali N., Piloter un établissement scolaire, De Boeck, Bruxelles, 2001.Timmerman C., Onderwijs maakt het verschil. Socioculturele praxis en etniciteitsbeleving bij

Turkse jonge vrouwen, Acco, Leuven, 1999.Todorov T., Michail Bakhtine: le principe dialogique suivi de Écrits du Circle de Bakhtine, Éditions

du Suil, Paris, 1981, Engl. trans. Mkhail Bakhtin: The dialogical principle, The University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 1984.

Tossavainen K. – Tawse S. – Turunen H. – Voutilainen U. – Perttula J., Collaborative learning in health care teacher training:A comprative study of Finnish and British students´experiences. in: Häkkinen K. (ed.), Multicultural education.Refl ection on Theory and Practice, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, 1998: 182-192.

Tosteson D.C. – Adelstein S.J. – Carver, S.T. (eds.), New pathways to medical education:Learning to learn at Harvard Medical School, Harvard University Press, Cambridge (MA), 1994.

Trochim W.M.K., Concept mapping: soft science or hard art? In: Evaluation and program plan-ning, 1999, 12 (1): 87-110.

Turner T., Anthropology and multiculturalism: What is anthropology that multiculturalists should be mindful of it? In: Cultural Anthropology, 1993, 8 (4): 411-429.

Turner V., The ritual process: structure and anti-structure, Aldine Pub. Co., Chicago, 1969.Turner V.W., Dewey, Dilthey, and drama: An essay in the anthropology of experience. In: Turner

V. – Bruner E. M. (eds.), The anthropology of experience, University of Illinois Press, Chicago, 1986.

Ulich E., Arbeitspsychologie, vdf-ethz-Verlag, Zürich, 1998.UNESCO, Grunwald declaration on Media Education, Grunwald, Germany, 1982, available in:

http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ulis/.UNESCO, International conference on education, 43rd session, The contribution of education to

cultural development, 1992, available in: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ulis/.UNESCO, Our creative diversity: Report of the World Commission on culture and development,

1995, available in: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ulis/.UNESCO, Sharing a world of difference: The Earth’s linguistic, cultural and biological diversity,

2005, available in: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ulis/.UNESCO, Universal Declaration on cultural diversity, 2001, available in: http://unesdoc.unesco.

org/ulis/.

298 | References

Universal Declaration of human rights, 1948, available in: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/.

Van Dijk T., Racism and the press, Routledge, London, 1991.Van Dijk T., Communicating racism. Ethnic prejudice in thought and talk, Sage, Newbury Park,

CA, 1987.Van Dijk T., Discourse and the reproduction of racism, Paper presented at the World Congress of

Sociology. Delhi, Summer 1986. CRES Publication Series. Working paper No 6. Center for Race and Ethnic Studies (CRES), University of Amsterdam, 1987, It. trans. Il discorso razzista. La riproduzione del pregiudizio nel discorso quotidiano. Rubbettino, Soveria Mannelli, 1994.

Van Dijk T., Elite discourse and macis, Sage, Newbury Park (CA), 1993.Van Dijk T., Ideology: A multidisciplinary introduction, Sage, London, 1998, It. trans. Ideologia.

Discorso e costruzione sociale del pregiudizio, Carocci, Roma, 2004.Van Mens – Verhulst J., Diversiteit: denkkader, principe en competentie. Sleutel tot vraagsturing in

een gevarieerde samenleving? Vakgroep vrouwenhulpverlening, Utrecht, 2003: 1-18.Vandana S., Monoculture of the mind. Perspectives on Biodiversity and Biotechnology, Natraj Pub-

lishers, Dehradum 1993, It. trans. Monoculture della mente. Biodiversità, biotecnologia e agri-coltura scientifi ca, Bollati Boringhieri, Torino 1995.

Verstraete G., Naar een interculturalisering van het welzijnswerk, Alert, Antwerpen, 1999.Vygotskij L.S., Mind in society: the development of higher psychological process, Harvard Univer-

sity Press, Cambridge (MA), 1978.Waldenfels B., Antwortregister, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, 1994.Waldenfels B., Phänomenologie als Xenologie. Das Paradox einer Wissenschaft des Fremden, In:

Topographie des Fremden. Studien zur Phänomenologie des Fremden 1, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main, 1997: 85-109.

Wallman S., The Boundaries of ’race’: Processes of ethnicity in England, in Man, New Series, 1978, 13 (2): 200-217.

Wieviorka M., La différence culturelle. Une reformulation des débats, Balland, Paris, 2001, It. trans. La differenza culturale, Laterza, Roma-Bari, 2002.

Wieviorka M., Le racisme, une introduction, La Découverte, Paris, 1998, It. trans., Il razzismo Laterza, Roma-Bari, 2000.

Wieviorka M., L’espace du racisme, Seuil, Paris, 1991, It. trans., Lo spazio del razzismo, il Sag-giatore, Milano, 1993.

Wimmer A., The making an unmaking of ethnic boundaries: A multilevel process theory. In: American Journal of Sociology, 2008, 113 (4): 970-1022.

Wiske M.S., What is teaching for understanding?, In Wiske M.S. (ed.), Teaching for understand-ing: Linking research with practice, Jossey-Bass Publishing, San Francisco, 1998.

Zammuner V.L., I focus group, il Mulino, Bologna, 2003.Zoll R., Was ist Solidaritat heute?, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main 2000, It. trans., La solidarietà.

Eguaglianza e differenza, il Mulino, Bologna 2003.

Websiteshttp://college.holycross.edu/eej/Volume33/V33N1P1_19.pdfhttp://dileahs.arteveldehs.be/dokeos/index.php?arteveldehs_auth=truehttp://iteslj.org/Articles/http://stuwww.uvt.nl/~csmeets/http://szochalo.hu/http://ublib.buffalo.edu/libraries/projects/cases/case.htmlhttp://www.dokeos.com/http://www.geert-hofstede.com/

References | 299

http://www.icic.be/http://www.interculturalrelations.com/http://www.refl ectivepractices.co.uk/cms/index.phphttp://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ http://www.unesco.org/delors/http://www.unesco.org/en/education http://www.unige.ch/fapse/life/welcome.htmlhttp://www.uni-hildesheim.de/de/index.htmhttp://www.univie.ac.at/constructivism/journal/2/2-3/136.peschl http://www.usability.gov/basics/usercntrd.html

FilmographyAe fond kiss, dir. by K. Loach, UK/DE/ES/IT, 2004, 104’Bend it Like Beckham, dir. by G. Chadha, UK-Germany, 2002, 112’Crash, dir. by P. Haggis, US-Germany, 2004, 113’Der Schwarzfahrer, dir. by P. Danquart, Germany, 1992, 12’Missisippi Masala, dir. by N. Mira, US, 1991, 118’Persepolis, dir. by M. Satrapi M. – V. Paronnaud, France, 2007, 35’Relou, dir. by F. R. Nacro, France, 2001, 6’Syriana, dir. by S. Gaghan, US, 2005, 128’The Cookie Thief, dir. by K. Sehringer, Switzerland, 1999, 8’

FD

Testo digitato

Documents

Sociality as a Basic Dimension of Intercultural Competences. Intercultural Education in a Sociological Perspective