Milton J. Bennett

Measuring intercultural sensitivity: The intercultural development inventory

Today, the importance of intercultural competence in both global and domestic contexts is well recognized. Bennett (1986, 1993b) posited a framework for conceptualizing dimensions of intercultural competence in his developmental model of intercultural sensitivity (DMIS). The DMIS constitutes a progression of worldview ‘‘orientations toward cultural difference’’ that comprise the potential for increasingly more sophisticatedintercultural experiences. Three ethnocentric orientations, where one’s culture is experiencedas central to reality (Denial, Defense, Minimization), andthree ethnorelative orientations, where one’s culture is experiencedin the context of other cultures (Acceptance, Ad aptation, Integration), are identified in the DMIS. Basedon this theoretical framework, the Intercultural Development Inventory (IDI) was constructed to measure the orientations toward cultural differences described in the DMIS. The result of this work is a 50-item (with 10 additional demographic items), paper-and-pencil measure of intercultural competence. Confirmatory factor analyses, reliability analyses, and construct validity tests validated five main dimensions of the DMIS, which were measured with the following scales: (1) DD (Denial/Defense) scale (13 items, alpha=0.85); (2) R (Reversal) scale (9 items, alpha=0.80); (3) M (Minimization) scale (9 items, alpha=0.83), (4) AA (Acceptance/Adaptation) scale (14 items, alpha=0.84; and(5) an EM (EncapsulatedMarginality) scale (5 items, alpha=0.80). While no systematic gender differences were found, significant differences by gender were found on one of the five scales (DD scale). No significant differences on the scale

A developmental approach to training for intercultural sensitivity

Abstract The development of Intercultural sensitivity demands attention to the subjective experience of the learner. The key to such sensitivity and related skills in Intercultural communication is the way in which learners construe cultural difference. This article suggests a continuum of stages of persona! growth that allows trainers to diagnose the level of sensitivity of individuals and groups and to sequence material according to a developmental plan. The developmental continuum moves from ethnocentrisrn to ethnorelativism . Earlier stages of the continuum define the parochial denial of difference, the evaluative defense against difference, and the universalist position of minimization of difference. Later stages define the acceptance of difference, adaptation to difference, and the integration of difference into ones world view. The stages of development are illustrated with typical statements and behaviors of learners that can be used to diagnose levels of sensitivity, and strategies to facilitate movement from each stage to the next are suggested. Special attention is given to questions of ethics and credibility that often arise in intercultural training situations.

Defining, measuring, and facilitating intercultural learning: a conceptual introduction to the Intercultural Education double supplement

If you do not already think so, the papers in this volume will convince you that study abroad has changed. At the university level, it has transcended its history as a ‘grand tour’ for the leisure class and the more plebian ‘junior year abroad’. Now university study abroad encompasses massive mobility of students among European Union universities and to and from the US and other countries through a myriad school-based and consortia-based programs. At the secondary (high school) level, the traditional AFS Intercultural Programs year in the US or Europe has been expanded by AFS and other organizations to include shorter programs to and from a broader range of countries. Added to the change in format and destination are educational foci that go well beyond traditional study to include internships, service learning and other learning opportunities. However, a basic tenet of international educational exchange and study abroad has remained unchanged. Every program, no matter at what level, format or focus, continues to claim that educational cross-cultural contact contributes to intercultural competence and thus to global citizenship. Whether that citizenship takes the form of transnational European, or international American, or citizen of the world, it is based on the idea that exposure to cultural differences is ‘broadening’ and therefore a legitimate aspect of education in the modern world. Although the concern is not new (M.J. Bennett 2009 this supplement; Vande Berg 2009 this supplement), the rapidly expanding horizons of study abroad have given new urgency to the question of exactly what is meant by ‘global citizenship’ or ‘intercultural competence’, how they should be addressed pedagogically in programs, and how they should be assessed. A related question concerns how governments and

Overcoming the Golden Rule: Sympathy and Empathy

The Golden Rule enjoins us to treat others as we would like to be treated. But inherent in the Rule is an assumption of similarity: that others are like ourselves and therefore want to be treated s...