Introduction to the Thematic Section: Intercultural Learning

Abstract

One outcome of the transformation and maturity of academic disciplines is the emergence of new perspectives and concepts that encourage us to question and challenge rather than continuously recirculate traditionally accepted knowledge Þ rmly entrenched in disciplinary ‘canons’. Many scholars in the Þ eld of intercultural communication are today forcefully resisting the simplistic categories and dichotomies of people and cultures offered before the turn of the century by theorists such as Edward Hall (e.g. 1990) and Geert Hofstede (e.g. 2001) in favour of nuanced and critically informed perspectives. The 18 th annual conference of the Nordic Network of Intercultural Communication (NIC) held at the University of Helsinki in 2011 focused on these divergent perspectives through the conference theme of ‘Theoretical Turbulence’. Although ‘turbulence’ suggests trouble and points to a generational battle between the old canon and emerging perspectives within the Þ eld of intercultural communication (Poutiainen 2014), ‘turbulence’ can also suggest potentials that unleash ambiguity and wonder. From an educational perspective, ‘turbulence’ and its related associations to movement, wonder and ambiguity, offers a potentially powerful point of departure for learning (Tange 2014). The American educational philosopher John Dewey had already written on the importance of ambiguity for learning processes: “Thinking begins in what may fairly enough be called a forked-road situation, a situation which is ambiguous, which presents a dilemma, which proposes alternatives” (1910, p. 11). If, according to Dewey, ambiguity leaves us in a ‘forked-road’ situation, then the themes of theoretical turbulence and the potential for turbulence to be a constructive force in refl ective learning offer several directions. The committee behind the 19 th annual conference of NIC that was held Aarhus University in 2012 were determined to follow a path highlighting the need to foreground intercultural pedagogies, diverse sites of learning, and the types and range of competences that have become necessary for students and professionals to acquire in order to engage as global citizens (Davies 2006) or as intercultural citizens (Jackson 2011). The theme of 2012 conference was ‘Internationalization at Home – Contact, Communication and Change’ and suggested how intercultural encounters inevitably cause us to think about who we are and how those perceptions place us in relation to others. Arguably, such refl ections can and indeed should be used to raise intercultural awareness and strengthen our capacity to navigate in an increasingly complex and interconnected world. Professor Helen Spencer-Oatey from Warwick University struck this chord when she outlined a framework for developing ‘Global Graduates’ (Spencer-Oatey 2012) in her keynote lecture. One of the implications of negotiating complexity is that the Þ eld of intercultural communication can no longer be primarily concerned with the identiÞ cation and categorization of ‘difference’, which has the tendency to drive people apart rather than bring them in closer proximity. Instead, the theme of intercultural learning rests on a more positive idea that international and multicultural organizations such as universities, NGOS and global Þ rms be used as diverse sites to establish learning communities where participants accept ambiguity as a source of potential learning rather than a cultural barrier to be overcome.