Exploring and Assessing Intercultural Competence - Center for ...
Exploring and Assessing Intercultural Competence - Center for ...
Exploring and Assessing Intercultural Competence - Center for ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<strong>Exploring</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Assessing</strong> <strong>Intercultural</strong> <strong>Competence</strong><br />
Cronbach Alpha score <strong>and</strong> percentage of component variance explained <strong>for</strong> intercultural<br />
competence.)<br />
Table 7: Composite<br />
<strong>Intercultural</strong> Competency<br />
<strong>Center</strong> <strong>for</strong> Social Development<br />
Washington University in St. Louis<br />
Factor<br />
Loadings<br />
(Beginning of<br />
Service)<br />
Factor<br />
Loadings<br />
(End of<br />
Service)<br />
Knowledge 0.537 0.896<br />
Attitude 0.871 0.909<br />
Skills 0.944 0.906<br />
Awareness<br />
Source: Alumni Survey 2006<br />
0.918 0.923<br />
Table 8 includes overall descriptive statistics including sample size, mean scores on the four ICC<br />
dimensions, <strong>and</strong> their st<strong>and</strong>ard errors. In line with one of the main assumptions underlying this<br />
study, the mean scores <strong>for</strong> the overall ICC construct <strong>and</strong> its four sub-components do show<br />
measurable changes from beginning to end of service during the intercultural sojourn.<br />
Table 8: Descriptive Statistics <strong>for</strong> <strong>Intercultural</strong> Competency <strong>and</strong> its Components<br />
Beginning of Service End of Service<br />
Dimension N Mean St. Error Mean Std. Error<br />
Knowledge 28 10.13 1.34 34.14 1.37<br />
Attitude 28 21.86 3.58 42.29 1.70<br />
Skill 28 12.14 2.40 30.11 1.76<br />
Awareness 28 19.29 4.27 52.93 3.09<br />
Inter Cultural Competency (ICC) 28 15.85 2.51 39.87 1.81<br />
Source: Alumni Survey 2006<br />
Naturally, care must be taken in overgeneralizing the results observed <strong>and</strong> reported in this study<br />
because of the limited sample size. A somewhat higher st<strong>and</strong>ard error in Table 8 is probably<br />
indicative of the size limitation. Even so, additional statistical analysis suggests strong support <strong>for</strong><br />
the main assumptions proposed <strong>and</strong> tested. Mean scores at the end of service are definitely higher<br />
in all four ICC components. On average, subjects showed overall improvement in ICC<br />
development, further reflected <strong>and</strong> supported by the improvements reflected in each of the<br />
individual sub-components. An increased sample size in a follow-on study will certainly be<br />
helpful toward generalizing these interim results further. [Note: The in<strong>for</strong>mation shown in Table<br />
8 is more graphically presented in Figures 2 <strong>and</strong> Figure 3 below.]<br />
22
Change language