At the root of any discussion of interculturality is the notion of ‘culture’, yet discussions of interculturality often fail to explicitly address the way this term is used, and the impacts of its complexity. Though discussions of ‘culture’ have been threaded throughout previous chapters, this chapter ties together the elements of interculturalisation through an explicit analysis of the concept itself; arguing that how we think about culture makes a difference to the way we act. The first section explores the ways that ‘culture’ and ‘Indonesian culture’ are understood by participants at different points in time. This discussion highlights the ways in which participants’ existing understandings of ‘culture’ pre-departure bear upon the way the experience was navigated. The latter part of the chapter examines the ‘limits’ of culture as a means of grappling with areas that proved challenging for participants while in-country, including institutions, dress, and gender. Probing the relationship between understandings of culture and interculturalisation, this analysis provides insight into the uneven development of intercultural capacities, highlighting the complex and laborious aspects of interculturalisation and signalling the significance of reflexivity and pedagogic orientation.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Attending to ‘Culture’ in Interculturalisation

  • Kate Naidu

摘要

At the root of any discussion of interculturality is the notion of ‘culture’, yet discussions of interculturality often fail to explicitly address the way this term is used, and the impacts of its complexity. Though discussions of ‘culture’ have been threaded throughout previous chapters, this chapter ties together the elements of interculturalisation through an explicit analysis of the concept itself; arguing that how we think about culture makes a difference to the way we act. The first section explores the ways that ‘culture’ and ‘Indonesian culture’ are understood by participants at different points in time. This discussion highlights the ways in which participants’ existing understandings of ‘culture’ pre-departure bear upon the way the experience was navigated. The latter part of the chapter examines the ‘limits’ of culture as a means of grappling with areas that proved challenging for participants while in-country, including institutions, dress, and gender. Probing the relationship between understandings of culture and interculturalisation, this analysis provides insight into the uneven development of intercultural capacities, highlighting the complex and laborious aspects of interculturalisation and signalling the significance of reflexivity and pedagogic orientation.