Self

Evaluation
Heather J. Hoskinson
EDSEC 786: Intercultural Communication
Kansas State University
January 12, 2011
I was motivated to take this class because I thought it would be especially relevant
to the teaching profession. As a teacher, I come into contact with students and parents
of various backgrounds, ethnicities, and cultural perspectives. I am aware also that my
own background and collective experience colors how I see the world. It was my hope
that this class would provide some insight as to how my bias operates and what I can
do to operate from a more objective paradigm.
I was intrigued to learn about all of the histories that shape our identity and how we
all understand the past differently, even if we experienced it jointly. To put it simply, my
America is not your America. It is a simple idea, but one easily forgotten when
communicating interculturally. Delving into this a bit further in this class will serve me as
a teacher when I am need to resist application of my ideals to people from a different
cultural background. For example, I would get very frustrated at the lack of motivation
on the part of my students and couldnt understand their apathy for education. I could
not fathom the lack of parental involvement. But when I consider their histories, it
explains some of their behavior and helps me to better understand them and some of
the reasoning behind their actions.
One of the readings that stuck out to me was the section in Chapter Four that talks
about hidden histories. I was largely unaware of the significant historical relationship
between Native American and African-American people. They are represented as two
entirely different and distinct segments of the U.S. population. The story of black
Indians is one that I learned nothing about in secondary U.S. history. What message is
being conveyed when a history such as this is just relegated to footnotes or not
mentioned at all? What effect does the aspect of public ignorance have on descendants
of this cultural group? These are some of the questions I asked myself when reading
about their hidden history and that of other groups as well.
I had never really considered the idea that different cultures have different value
orientations. It was interesting reading about The Nature of Human Nature (Martin &
Nakayama p. 97). I assumed that all humans view human nature basically the same.
However, as Martin and Nakayama point out, different cultures have different ideas
about the value orientation of humans. The American value orientation holds the idea
that humans are a mixture of good and evil. This leads us to focus more on
incarceration for those that violate the law, rather than emphasizing rehabilitation. I
previously did not make the connection between a foundation of Christianity in this
country and our preference for incarceration.
Value orientation also affects how we communicate with others. In the text (p. 98),
a student from Pakistan talks about how he had to adjust to American classrooms. In
Pakistan, education was carried out more formally and more respect was shown to the

professors, not calling them by their first name and using instead madame, sir, or
professor. The student, Ahmed, was in a bit of shock with the informal way that
students communicated with their professors.
Another new aspect within intercultural communication that I learned of is how
differently conflict is valued. Depending on which part of the world you hail from, conflict
may be seen as opportunity, or it may be seen as destructive. I was unaware that the
Amish see it as destructive (p. 433) and will go to great lengths to resist it, practicing
Gelassenheit. I personally think that passive resistance can be very useful in many
instances and that violence should always be a last resort, however, I found it hard to
stomach the idea of teaching my child to accept a beating rather than fighting back. It
encouraged me to reflect further on how I view conflict.
In classic Chinese thought, social harmony is highly valued. Conflict is typically to
be avoided if at all possible. This idea definitely challenged some ideas I had after
reading Wild Swans shortly before this class started. Wild Swans is the story of three
generations of Chinese women in the twentieth century, most of which time China
experienced significant upheaval and the advent of communism under Mao. The author
writes about the Cultural Revolution during the 60s and 70s, when conflict was a daily
fact of life. Friends, colleagues, and family members were throwing each other under
the bus in the name of communism so it seemed, left and right. (Well, they thought it
was in the name of communism. But fanaticism in the name of Mao would be more
accurate.) There were public beatings every day. So it is an interesting dichotomy to
read about how traditionally speaking, the Chinese prefer to avoid conflict, yet in
extreme political upheaval, this value orientation was somewhat abandoned.
One of the ideas that I am walking away with is the idea that humans, many times
over, revert to their emotions when communicating with others. We are emotional
beings, and we seem to take our anger and displace it. What I mean to say is, reading
over the textbook, its all pretty carefully and thoughtfully laid out and organized. It all
just seems to make sense. However, in reality all of the issues so calmly talked about in
the textbook can seem so much more volatile and complex. The shooting in Arizona
has just taken place of course, and maybe this is part of what is shadowing my thinking.
This incident is definitely telling in many ways, most still unknown. However, it is
definitely a powerful indicator of the need for improvement when it comes to intercultural
communication. I am not saying that if the young man could communicate better he
would not have committed murder. But I am talking about the two distinct groups of
thought that dominate American politics right now. Is it because our understanding of
one another is so poor that we are more distanced from each other than ever before,
and this distance creates the level of animosity that exists? It is an interesting topic, no
doubt, and is especially relevant to intercultural communication.
I would have liked to have seen the authors of the textbook explore the reasoning
behind mankinds propensity for stereotypes. Why do they exist? Where do they start?
Why are they so hard to be abolished once they are created? If there are positive
stereotypes, then why is stereotyping considered a bad policy? These are just some
examples of questions that I think provoke a lot of thought and challenge our thinking
when we attempt to answer them. I found myself thinking deeply about some of these

issues when watching Crash. It was quite interesting to go from reading the textbook to
watching Crash. So many different aspects of intercultural communication are
happening in Crash, back to back. There is a lot going on all at once for you to process.
However, the textbook, as I stated previously, is laid out in a very organized fashion.
You can take the time to read about one aspect of intercultural communication and the
ponder over it. It was the slow lane and Crash was the fast lane, both of which have
their advantages and disadvantages.
I have enjoyed reading, writing, and thinking about all of the issues within
intercultural communication. It has forced me to reflect on my communication habits
with others and encouraged me to not be so quick to judge when someone elses way of
thinking or communicating is different from my own. I think as U.S. citizens we have
nothing to lose and everything to gain when it comes to improving our intercultural
communication skills.