• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content

site logo
The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language
search
  • Home
  • About TESL-EJ
  • Vols. 1-15 (1994-2012)
    • Volume 1
      • Volume 1, Number 1
      • Volume 1, Number 2
      • Volume 1, Number 3
      • Volume 1, Number 4
    • Volume 2
      • Volume 2, Number 1 — March 1996
      • Volume 2, Number 2 — September 1996
      • Volume 2, Number 3 — January 1997
      • Volume 2, Number 4 — June 1997
    • Volume 3
      • Volume 3, Number 1 — November 1997
      • Volume 3, Number 2 — March 1998
      • Volume 3, Number 3 — September 1998
      • Volume 3, Number 4 — January 1999
    • Volume 4
      • Volume 4, Number 1 — July 1999
      • Volume 4, Number 2 — November 1999
      • Volume 4, Number 3 — May 2000
      • Volume 4, Number 4 — December 2000
    • Volume 5
      • Volume 5, Number 1 — April 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 2 — September 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 3 — December 2001
      • Volume 5, Number 4 — March 2002
    • Volume 6
      • Volume 6, Number 1 — June 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 2 — September 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 3 — December 2002
      • Volume 6, Number 4 — March 2003
    • Volume 7
      • Volume 7, Number 1 — June 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 2 — September 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 3 — December 2003
      • Volume 7, Number 4 — March 2004
    • Volume 8
      • Volume 8, Number 1 — June 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 2 — September 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 3 — December 2004
      • Volume 8, Number 4 — March 2005
    • Volume 9
      • Volume 9, Number 1 — June 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 2 — September 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 3 — December 2005
      • Volume 9, Number 4 — March 2006
    • Volume 10
      • Volume 10, Number 1 — June 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 2 — September 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 3 — December 2006
      • Volume 10, Number 4 — March 2007
    • Volume 11
      • Volume 11, Number 1 — June 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 2 — September 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 3 — December 2007
      • Volume 11, Number 4 — March 2008
    • Volume 12
      • Volume 12, Number 1 — June 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 2 — September 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 3 — December 2008
      • Volume 12, Number 4 — March 2009
    • Volume 13
      • Volume 13, Number 1 — June 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 2 — September 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 3 — December 2009
      • Volume 13, Number 4 — March 2010
    • Volume 14
      • Volume 14, Number 1 — June 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 2 – September 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 3 – December 2010
      • Volume 14, Number 4 – March 2011
    • Volume 15
      • Volume 15, Number 1 — June 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 2 — September 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 3 — December 2011
      • Volume 15, Number 4 — March 2012
  • Vols. 16-Current
    • Volume 16
      • Volume 16, Number 1 — June 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 2 — September 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 3 — December 2012
      • Volume 16, Number 4 – March 2013
    • Volume 17
      • Volume 17, Number 1 – May 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 2 – August 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 3 – November 2013
      • Volume 17, Number 4 – February 2014
    • Volume 18
      • Volume 18, Number 1 – May 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 2 – August 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 3 – November 2014
      • Volume 18, Number 4 – February 2015
    • Volume 19
      • Volume 19, Number 1 – May 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 2 – August 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 3 – November 2015
      • Volume 19, Number 4 – February 2016
    • Volume 20
      • Volume 20, Number 1 – May 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 2 – August 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 3 – November 2016
      • Volume 20, Number 4 – February 2017
    • Volume 21
      • Volume 21, Number 1 – May 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 2 – August 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 3 – November 2017
      • Volume 21, Number 4 – February 2018
    • Volume 22
      • Volume 22, Number 1 – May 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 2 – August 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 3 – November 2018
      • Volume 22, Number 4 – February 2019
    • Volume 23
      • Volume 23, Number 1 – May 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 2 – August 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 3 – November 2019
      • Volume 23, Number 4 – February 2020
    • Volume 24
      • Volume 24, Number 1 – May 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 2 – August 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 3 – November 2020
      • Volume 24, Number 4 – February 2021
    • Volume 25
      • Volume 25, Number 1 – May 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 2 – August 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 3 – November 2021
      • Volume 25, Number 4 – February 2022
    • Volume 26
      • Volume 26, Number 1 – May 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 2 – August 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 3 – November 2022
      • Volume 26, Number 4 – February 2023
    • Volume 27
      • Volume 27, Number 1 – May 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 2 – August 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 3 – November 2023
      • Volume 27, Number 4 – February 2024
    • Volume 28
      • Volume 28, Number 1 – May 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 2 – August 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 3 – November 2024
      • Volume 28, Number 4 – February 2025
    • Volume 29
      • Volume 29, Number 1 – May 2025
      • Volume 29, Number 2 – August 2025
      • Volume 29, Number 3 – November 2025
      • Volume 29, Number 4 – February 2026
    • Volume 30
      • Volume 30, Number 1 – May 2026
  • Books
  • How to Submit
    • Submission Info
    • Ethical Standards for Authors and Reviewers
    • TESL-EJ Style Sheet for Authors
    • TESL-EJ Tips for Authors
    • Book Review Policy
    • Media Review Policy
    • TESL-EJ Special issues
    • APA Style Guide
  • Editorial Board
  • Support

Acquiring Intercultural Communicative Competence from Textbooks: The Case of Flemish Adolescent Pupils Learning German

September 2002 — Volume 6, Number 2

Acquiring Intercultural Communicative Competence from Textbooks: The Case of Flemish Adolescent Pupils Learning German

Lies Sercu (2000)
Leuven, Belgium: Leuven University Press
Pp. 425
ISBN 90 5867 026 0
Price: Belgian Franc 1,100; €27.00

Description

This book presents a detailed analysis of how six German textbooks that are designed for use in Dutch-speaking secondary schools in Belgium affect the development of intercultural communicative competence in learners. In the introduction (p. 14), the author raises two main research questions:

  1. What potential do the investigated textbook series have for promoting the acquisition of intercultural communicative competence with the pupil population under examination?
  2. What recommendations can be formulated for revising existing textbook series to enhance their potential for promoting the acquisition of intercultural communicative competence?

To investigate these questions, the author gathers data from six secondary schools in different areas of Flanders: three schools are in Limburg close to the German boarder, and three are in West Flanders furthest away from the German boarder. Schools in different regions were selected because proximity to Germany creates different attitudes toward Germany and the importance of learning German. A total of 592 students, 371 girls and 221 boys participated in the study. The students ranged in age from fifteen (4th-year students) to eighteen (6th-year students); 372 were in general-education schools, and 220 in vocational schools. The data were collected during the 1994-95 school year, five years before the publication of the book. [-1-]

The research methodology used in the study combined quantitative and qualitative methods. Quantitative data were obtained from a questionnaire that contained attitude scales (e.g., semantic differential, social distance, etc.), questions on intercultural contact, and several open-ended written response questions. The questionnaire included questions on other nationalities (Americans, British, and French) and ethnic groups in Belgium (Walloons) to provide a basis for comparison. Based on response to the questionnaire, 210 students were selected for semi-structured interviews lasting 20-60 minutes. The interviews were limited to 210 for logistical reasons and care was taken so that the students selected for the interview were representative of those who had completed the questionnaire. These interviews were designed to elicit data on student perceptions of German culture. Additional qualitative data included an analysis of the contents of the textbooks. The quantitative data were analyzed using SPSS software, and the qualitative data were transcribed by hand and then analyzed using a coding system that was designed to provide a summary of the information in the interview as it related to the research questions in the study.

In developing the methodological framework for the study, the author uses the definition of intercultural communicative competence developed by Byram and Zarate (1994). This definition is based on four savoirs: savoir-apprendre, the ability to learn about other cultures, savoir-faire, the ability to apply skills to unknown situations, savoirs, cultural references and explicit knowledge of cultures, and savoir-être, respect and tolerance for other cultures.

Results of the study showed that attitudes toward Germans changed little from the 4th year to the 6th (final) year of schooling and that attitudes toward Germans were more negative than toward American, British, French, or Walloons. Fourth-year students in West Flanders had the most negative attitudes toward Germans, and all students reported that their grandparents had negative attitudes toward Germans. The interviews showed that there is very little change in attitudes toward Germans over time. Many students still viewed Germans from the “Germany-equals-war schema,” but students with more knowledge of German culture and society had more diverse perceptions of Germany.

With respect to textbooks, the author concluded that the prevailing negative image of Germans, particularly the association of Germany with war, showed that textbooks did not have a sufficient impact on improving students’ intercultural communicative competence. From this, the author recommended that focus more intensely including contents aimed at developing the four savoirs of intercultural communicative competence.

Evaluation

This book is important for several reasons. First, it addresses the issue of intercultural communicative competence in foreign language learning in the context of languages and cultures that have much in common and that share a common European identity. The enduring strength of negative national stereotypes based on political events fifty years before the research was conducted is perhaps one of the most poignant findings of the study. The author’s conclusion that language teaching, and particularly language teaching materials, be directed toward improving intercultural communicative competence serves as an important reminder of the positive role of foreign language education in reducing negative stereotypes toward groups of people that dogmatic politicians exploit to mobilize people to support various causes.

Second, the research methodology offers a valuable and easily replicable format for research on learners and language learning materials in educational settings. The combination of questionnaires, interviews, and textbook analysis, creates a rich corpus of data that transcends the tired quantitative-qualitative dichotomy. The risk of such triangulation, of course, is that the resulting data is too unwieldy to analyze, but the methodology in this study shows that, rather than aiming for a rigid correlation between sets of data, the data can be used to elucidate various phenomena that form a coherent narrative in the end. [-2-]

Third, the book contains a rich range of details that are useful to researchers in a number of fields. The literature review, for example, is extensive and contains detailed presentations of literature in German and, to a lesser extent, French, that is rarely cited in the English-speaking world. The detailed presentation of the interview data in the results section makes for very interesting reading for anyone interested in how foreign language learners construct their perceptions of other cultures. Likewise, the analysis of German textbooks is thorough and offers insight into how to analyze textbooks from the perspective of intercultural communicative competence. Such a framework is especially helpful in nations where the choice of textbooks is limited by government approval or financial and market conditions. Teachers of German as a foreign language, in particular, will find the analysis of textbooks interesting.

To conclude, Acquiring Intercultural Communicative Competence from Textbooks offers a refreshingly new perspective on the old problem of how foreign language education can contribute to improving intercultural understanding, thereby improving the potential for peace. This topic, like so many other topics in foreign language education, comes and goes, but after a decade of relative neglect in the 1990s, it is returning to the center of discussion as people search for solutions to the intercultural hate that plagues much of the world today.

Reference

Byram, M. & Zarate, G. (1994). Definitions, objectives, and evaluation of cultural competence. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.

Robert J. Fouser
Kyoto University
<rjfouser@msg.biglobe.ne.jp>

© Copyright rests with authors. Please cite TESL-EJ appropriately.

Editor’s Note: Dashed numbers in square brackets indicate the end of each page for purposes of citation.

[-3-]

© 1994–2026 TESL-EJ, ISSN 1072-4303
Copyright of articles rests with the authors.