彭然

Currently a trend to decrease acquisition of ‘knowledge about and increase acquisition of ‘knowledge how is popular in both East Asia and Europe， it makes intercultural competence as a conceptualization. Parmenter （2003） illustrates that the content is less important than the relationship between teacher and learner. It is not only a question of command and rule； but also a consequence of the teachers responsibility for the pupils moral and humanistic development. Starkey （2003） indicates that the moral dimension of education for democratic citizenship and intercultural competence is gradually recognized in the European context； however， the importance of this process for the relationship between teachers and learners is usually ignored.

Intercultural competence is generally to be an aim of language teaching. Byrams intercultural communicative model focuses more specifically in the field of world language education. Byrams （1997） five-factor model consists of attitude， knowledge， the skills of interpreting and relating， the skills of discovery and interaction， and critical cultural awareness. He suggests that in this framework， attitude is an effective concept which has both emotional and cognitive dimensions. It is emphasized that postnatal nurture of open-mindedness instead of natural-born psychological disposition or static humor. Both the procedural knowledge （know- how） about the socio-cultural aspects of the cultures and the declarative knowledge （know-that） about factual information of the culture relevant can be included in this construction of knowledge. In the same way， the skills contain not only intercultural skills of interpreting and discovering， but also the practical skills， such as social skills to conduct daily communication and routine activities to be accepted by the host culture， which are important to solve intercultural conflicts especially when they seem incompatible.

Such a model has been made accessible to teachers of English as a foreign language in the form of guidance on its application in the classroom by Sercu （2005）. Sercu advocates that foreign language teachers need to revise professionalism by refreshing their knowledge， attitudes， competence and skills. For example， Sercus research indicates that teachers need sufficient socio-cultural knowledge of the target language which they are teaching： they must understand that cultural models differ； they have an intimate knowledge of the standard of communication （e.g. non-verbal communication， notions， speech acts）； they define the objective of foreign language education on the basis of intercultural competence acquisition and are willing to actually work towards achieving the objectives， they create learning environments that promote intercultural competence acquisition； they help learners to combine their own cultures with foreign cultures， to compare cultures and to empathize with points of view from other cultures； they assess learning materials from an intercultural perspective.

The importance of intercultural development has been widely recognized and documented in foreign language education in Europe， Australia and North American since late 1980s （Byram； Zarate 1994）. Teachers are encouraged to adjust their communicative competence oriented teaching practice in order to help students to acquire intercultural competence.

Despite the fact that many countries national curricula for language teaching have been following the intercultural shift in theory， several researchers argue that teaching for intercultural competence has not yet yielded desired outcomes as specified in the theoretical literature. Sercu （2000） showed that the presence of intercultural themes in courses and textbooks did very little in itself to promote intercultural competence. Roberts （1998） found that being confronted with variation or being involved in intercultural contacts does not necessarily and automatically lead to a more balanced view or insight in factors that govern intercultural contexts.

Sercu （2006） reported that the majority of European foreign language teachers divide their study into two categories in terms of cultural teaching practices. Teachers in the first category focus ‘primarily and almost exclusively on teaching communicative competence. For those in the second category， though their primary focus is to promote the acquisition of communicative competence， they also teach knowledge about the target language country and its cultures. The researcher points out that their teacher- centered activities and techniques employed indicate that while their cultural teaching practices broaden students cultural knowledge， they do not automatically engage students in seeking cultural information from various sources and reflecting critically on it.

Larzen-Ostermark （2008） identifies cultural teaching practices in three categories： （1） Pedagogy of information. Teachers pay more attention to convey cultural knowledge to students through the instructional activities. （2） Pedagogy of preparation. Teachers will engage students in cultural learning through the stories of teachers intercultural experience and conducting intercultural dialogues， with a focus on the differences between home and the target cultures. Their teaching helped to prepare students for their appropriate behaviors while communicating with people from English speaking countries. （3） Pedagogy of encounter， which reflects a true intercultural perspective in language teaching. Teachers are willing to engage their students in experiencing both ‘authentic encounters such as visits by native speakers or virtual contacts and ‘simulated encounter such as role-plays or mental constructs. Their teaching reflected a ‘reciprocal and ‘dialog perspective which included both the home and the target culture.

It can be seen that intercultural competence is not only an aim for language teaching but also for linguistic competence. Teachers try to teach students about cultural knowledge from the declarative knowledge （know about） to the procedural knowledge （know how to） and it is useful to help learners to apply and practice their learning language. Therefore， intercultural competence is not only an aim for language teaching， but also contributes the personal development of the individual.

References：

[1]Byram，M.，and Zarate，G.（1994）Definitions，Objectives and Assessment of Sociocultural Competence.Strasbourg：Council of Europe.

[2]Byram，M.（1997）Teaching and Assessing Intercultural Communicative Competence.Clevedon：Multilingual Matters.

[3]Corbett，J.（2003）An Intercultural Approach to English Language Teaching.Clevedon：Multilingual Matters.

[4]Larzen-ostermark，E.（2008）The intercultural dimension in EFL-teaching：A study of conceptions among Finland-Swedish comprehensive school teachers.Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research，52（5），527-547.

[5]Sercu，L.（2005）Testing intercultural competence in a foreign language.Current approaches and future challenges.BELL Belgian Journal of English Language and Literature 3：151-167.

[6]Sercu，L.（2000）Acquiring Intercultural Communicative Competence from textbooks.The case of Flemish adolescent pupils learning German.Leuven：Leuven University Press.

[7]Sercu，L.（2006）The foreign language and intercultural competence teacher：the acquisition of a professional identity.Intercultural Education，17（1），55-72.

[8]Starkey，H.（2003）Intercultural competence and education for democratic citizenship：implications for language teaching methodology.In Byram，M（ed），Intercultural Competence（63-83）.Strasbourg：Council of Europe

Parmenter，L.（2003）Describing and defining intercultural communicative competence – international perspectives.In Byram，M（ed），Intercultural Competence（119-147）.Strasbourg： Council of Europe.