Intercultural competence as a perceived predictor of cooperative EFL learning and classroom life among Ethiopian university students

Abstract

This study aims to establish the significance of intercultural competence (IC) as a perceived predictor of cooperative EFL learning and classroom life among Ethiopian higher education students. In so doing, a quantitative correlational design was employed to answer the research questions. The data were gathered through Intercultural Competence Scale (ICS) and Classroom Life Measure (CLM) questionnaires administered to 292 randomly sampled undergraduate Communicative English Skills students. Correlation and multiple linear regression were computed via SPSS to analyze the data. The results have revealed that there is a significant positive relationship between perceived IC and cooperative classroom life (CCL) among the target EFL students. Besides, learners’ overall IC is found to be a significant positive perceived predictor of CCL, with intercultural knowledge, behavioral performance and affective orientation significantly contributing to this effect as individual IC factors. Based on the findings, fresh insights and implications are offered for intercultural cooperative EFL learning theory, pedagogy and research in higher education.

Keywords:

• Culture
• intercultural competence
• cooperative learning
• cooperative classroom life
• English as a foreign language (EFL)
• foreign language teaching
• intercultural classrooms
• higher education

REVIEWING EDITOR:

• Stephen Darwin, Universidad Alberto Hurtado, Chile

SUBJECTS:

• Adult Education and Lifelong Learning
• Higher Education
• Theories of Learning
• Teaching Assistants
• Theory of Education
• Classroom Practice
• Language Teaching & Learning

1. Introduction

The field of foreign language teaching (FLT) since the early 20th century can be characterized by growing theoretical and empirical efforts to develop learner-centered, active teaching methods toward enhancing students’ motivation and achievement through peer interaction and support. Such efforts, in turn, led to the emergence and worldwide popularity of cooperative learning (CL). The key premise to CL is that the more people become positively interdependent and work together to achieve a common goal, the more likely they will succeed in accomplishing the task as well as develop positive feelings about themselves and each other (Johnson & Johnson, 2014; Johnson et al., 2013). In its pedagogical sense, CL can be defined as a set of instructional techniques in which students work in small groups toward achieving a mutual learning goal and get assessed on the basis of their achievement of this goal (Slavin, 2013). Besides, Tammaro and Merlino (2015) argue that CL further constitutes a didactic meaning that signifies cooperation among learners in pluralistically organized groups. Cultural diversity is, as such, a critical part of cooperative group dynamics (Jones et al., 2021). It then follows that CL is “a context where the perspective[s] of intercultural pedagogy are expressed” (Tammaro & Merlino, 2015, p. 129). In effect, the CL method is now globally applied in teaching all subjects at all levels of education.

At the same time, foreign language classrooms have become places where different cultures come across and interact, and culture is considered as an inseparable part of how people live, learn and use language (Byram, 2021). This, in turn, has led to a cultural shift in FLT. Until recently, the popular goal of FLT had been to enable students acquire communicative competence, consisting of grammatical, sociolinguistic, discourse, and strategic competences (Canale & Swain, 1980). Subsequent social-constructivist and pragmatic researchers, however, claimed that the communicative competence model is not responsive to the real-life use of language in cross-cultural communication. According to Kim (2020), language teaching is more than just teaching language skills. It also means helping people to blend in diverse ways of life such that learning language “can immerse students in others’ worlds, and it can foster empathy and understanding across social and political divides” (Kim, 2020, p. 519). By the same token, effective foreign language interaction (thus learning) entails intercultural competence (IC) – the ability to use appropriate knowledge, skills and attitudes so as to effectively communicate and function across different cultures (Byram, 2021; Byram, Gribkova & Starkey, 2002; Chao, 2016; Smith, Paige & Steglitz, 2003). Studies in this vein indicate a positive relationship between university students’ IC and foreign language skills development (Lysiuchenko, Sydorenko, Oleksiienko, Lysenko, & Hulych, 2021; Tran & Duong, 2018). With IC embraced on top of communicative competence, attaining intercultural communicative competence (ICC) has become the new goal of FLT.

Conversely, cultural diversity poses its own influences on students’ interpersonal communication, collaboration and learning behaviors, as well as the outcomes of these behaviors. Studies have reported that intercultural group exposure and interactions reduce tension and prejudice among diverse groups (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006), enhance interpersonal relationships (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2008) and promote intergroup tolerance (Shook & Fazio, 2008). Exposing groups to cultural diversity by itself does not yet guarantee desired CL outcomes as “culturally diverse students struggle to successfully engage and collaborate with each other” (EQUiiP, 2019, p. 1). Besides, misunderstandings and even conflicts tend to happen when learners from different cultural backgrounds are engaged in communicative group tasks (Huang et al., 2012; Okech et al., 2015; Poort et al., 2019). Cultural diversity also affects learners’ attitudes toward learning (Hannon & D’Netto, 2007), learning motivation (Lim, 2004), academic achievement (Pearce & Lin, 2007), etc.

The complexity of intercultural communication in university classrooms can even increase when the language of interaction is not the first language of participants (Byram, 2021; Egne, 2017). This describes the reality of EFL classrooms in Ethiopian higher education, where students from diverse ethnic, cultural and linguistic backgrounds learn together (Egne, 2020). Ethiopia consists of more than 80 ethnic and linguistic groups with over 200 dialects, and public universities constitute the highest level of learner diversity in the education system (Egne, 2014). This multicultural reality stipulates recognition of learners’ cultural identities and differences in the country’s higher education policy and practice in general (Abebaw, 2014; Egne, 2020; Rao & Abbi, 2018; Tariku & Gara, 2016) and cooperative EFL learning in particular (Betegiorgis et al., 2015; Meshesha, 2013; Tefera, Gillies & Manathunga, 2020). To this effect, development of EFL learners’ IC can contribute to CL and associated classroom experiences, collectively referred in this article to as cooperative classroom life (CCL).

Meanwhile, certain knowledge gaps in the existing body of intercultural higher education FLT research motivated this study. First, research in the area has predominantly been guided by, if not indigenous to, the historical, socio-cultural and philosophical orientations of Euro-Western societies and their educational institutions (Chilisa, 2011; Hall, 2014). As such, the international classroom is considered “as the panacea for intercultural competence development” (EQUiiP, 2019, p. 1). While much of the intercultural theory and research in FLT is developed in or drawn from the context of international classrooms often in the West (Glaser, 2010), the realities of indigenously intercultural universities in non-Western settings, including that of African countries like Ethiopia, rather remain obscured. Besides, IC has been widely researched and generalized as an outcome of foreign language learning (Byram, 2021; Chao, 2016; Glaser, 2010) and CL (de Hei et al., 2020; de Wit et al., 2015). The counter role and significance of IC as a predictor of CCL among university EFL learners is not yet clearly established by previous empirical research.

This study, therefore, aims to fill the aforesaid gaps by establishing the significance of IC as a predictor of cooperative EFL learning and classroom life from Ethiopian higher education students’ perspective. To this end, the following research questions are posed:

1. Is there any significant relationship between perceived IC and CCL among university EFL learners in Ethiopia?

2. Does perceived overall IC level significantly predict perceived CCL among university EFL learners in Ethiopia?

3. How significantly do individual IC factors contribute to the perceived prediction of CCL among university EFL learners in Ethiopia?

2. Theoretical literature and frameworks

2.1. Intercultural competence

There appears to be a consensus on the general concept of IC as an individual’s ability to think, interact and act effectively across different cultures (Leung et al., 2014). However, dissimilarities exist when it comes to the particular features, models and measures of IC. Literature, in fact, shows that there exist more than 30 IC models, with over 300 related constructs (Deardorff, 2011; Johnson et al., 2006; Leung et al., 2014).

One of the earliest models of IC is the Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity (DMIS) developed by Milton Bennett (1986). The model proposes that individuals go through six increasing stages of intercultural sensitivity: denial, defense, minimization, acceptance, adaptation, and integration. The Intercultural Development Inventory (IDI) model is another widely used IC model. It was developed by Mitchell Hammer and Milton Bennett in 1998, and, in line with Bennett’s DMIS model, it measures an individual’s level of intercultural sensitivity progressively from ethnocentric to ethnorelative. Perhaps the most widely recognized theoretical framework is Byram’s (1997) ICC model, which argues that individuals’ ability to effectively and appropriately interact in intercultural settings is measured in terms of their intercultural knowledge, skills and attitudes. The model’s due emphasis on both linguistic and cultural competences is considered among its strengths (Leung et al., 2014).

Such popular IC models are, however, typically established in Western sociocultural, linguistic and educational settings (Chao, 2014; Chilisa, 2011; Glaser, 2010; Griffith, Wolfeld, Armon, Rios, & Liu, 2016; Hall, 2014), where international classrooms are widely distributed and considered as the ideal habitat for IC development (EQUiiP, 2019). It follows that most IC theories including the aforementioned ones conform to the international university classrooms that are often located in Euro-Western countries with unstinting global scholarship programs. These theories thus tend to be indigenous to the societies and academia of their origin (i.e., the West) while the idiosyncratic intercultural realities of non-Western societies and their local higher education institutions arguably remain overgeneralized, if not eclipsed.

In view of that, Chao (2014) proposed the Intercultural Competence of EFL Students in Higher Education (IC-EFL-S-HE) model as an alternative approach to IC research and measurement in culturally diverse local university EFL classrooms. The model incorporates five factors as indicators of a person’s IC level. The first factor is “knowledge of intercultural interaction”, which involves an individual’s culture-general, culture-hybrid, and culture-specific knowledge about other cultures and intercultural interactions. The second factor, “affective orientation to intercultural interaction”, addresses the motivation, willingness and attitudes of a person toward intercultural communication. The third factor is “self-efficacy in intercultural situations”; it encompasses an individual’s self-confidence in handling others and adjusting her/himself in intercultural contexts. As the fourth factor, “behavioral performance in intercultural interaction” is concerned with a person’s proficiency in using English as a lingua-franca (ELF), effective use of communication strategies, and appropriate interactive behavior. Finally, “display of intercultural consciousness,” the fifth factor, is about attentive preparation, self-monitoring and reflection abilities of a person before, during as well as after intercultural interactions.

This model is highly comprehensive in that it integrates the various aspects of IC proposed in previous models. These include cognitive aspects, covering knowledge of shared values and belief systems, awareness of negotiating intercultural complexities, and ability to learn new cultures; affective aspects, involving emotional or psychological attitudes to cultural diversity; behavioral aspects, including ELF proficiency and effective communicative strategy use for intercultural negotiation and mediation; and meta-cognitive aspects, comprising the ability to plan communication and realize cultural information during such communications (see Chao, 2014, Figure 1).

Figure 1. The IC-EFL-S-HE model (Chao, 2014, p. 101).

2.2. Cooperative learning and classroom life

The current conceptualization of CL is rooted in the social interdependence theory. This theory argues that individuals are motivated to work together when they perceive that their success depends on the success of all the other group members (Johnson & Johnson, 1983; Johnson et al., 2014). Successful CL outcomes can be attained through positive interdependence, promotive interaction, individual accountability, active social and group skills, and effective group processing. Positive interdependence refers to the principle that group members must depend on one another to achieve a common goal. It can be attained when all group members have a common goal to achieve by working together (i.e. goal interdependence), their own distinct role and contribution in completing the task (i.e., task interdependence), and the willingness to share resources with their partners (i.e., resource interdependence). Positive interdependence enhances student motivation, engagement and achievement in CL. Promotive interaction occurs when individual members encourage and facilitate each other’s efforts to accomplish the group goal. It helps to build mutual trust and respect among group members as well as to create a positive learning environment. In this sense, CL is effective when group interaction promotes positive relationship, motivation and learning among students. Individual accountability exists when each group member is held responsible for the success or failure of group, which can be realized via self and peer evaluations. It promotes greater effort and active engagement among students. Social and group skills are built through students’ successful learning and demonstration of knowing and trusting each other, communicating accurately and unambiguously, accepting and supporting each other, and resolving conflicts constructively. These skills help students succeed not only in the classroom but also in real-life social interactions. Finally, group processing occurs when group members evaluate their work in terms of how well they are attaining their goals and discuss ways of maintaining successful work relationships. This allows learners to reflect on helpful and unhelpful behaviors as well as make decisions on what to maintain, change or avoid (Johnson & Johnson, 2009; Johnson et al., 2013; Johnson et al., 2014; Figure 2).

Figure 2. Elements of CL (authors’ own portrayal based on Johnson & Johnson, 1989; 2009).

Scholars such as David and Roger Johnson have prominently proposed the theoretical basis for social interdependence. In so doing, they have drawn a great deal from the earlier works of Morton Deutsch (1949; 1962), in which Deutsch noted that social interdependence shapes the psychological processes in cooperation through cathexis, substitutability and inducibility.

Cathexis refers to the investment of psychological energy in objects outside of oneself, such as friends, family and work. This applies to CL in that effective cooperation is built on a strong sense of “us” beyond “me” provided that the success of an individual group member depends on the success of the other members – i.e. positive interdependence. It follows that positively interdependent individuals in a group believe they can achieve their goals only if others can achieve thereof as well; hence, they invest their energy and commit themselves for the others in the group as much as they do for themselves – i.e. positive cathexis.

Substitutability means the degree to which actions of one person substitute for the actions of another person. It can also be used to describe the way individuals represent or stand for each other in teamwork situations. By the same token, in a positively interdependent CL environment, individual learners are expected to have the psychological readiness to stand in for, represent and/or act on the behalf of the other members of their group. This is but unlikely for competitive and individualistic learning associated with negative and no interdependence, respectively.

Inducibility refers to the degree of psychological openness to be influenced by and to influence others. Students differ in this regard owing to their cultural or personal backgrounds; as such, some can be resistant to peer guidance, assessment or feedback while others are more open-minded. Positively interdependent students in CL are associated with the latter.

Deutsch further argues that social interdependence guides not only the psychological processes in cooperation but also the interactional patterns therein (Johnson, 2003). To be precise, positive interdependence leads to promotive interaction (i.e., individuals encouraging and facilitating each other’s efforts to complete the task) whereas negative interdependence results in oppositional interaction (i.e. individuals obstructing each other’s efforts to complete the task).

Subsequently, upon a thorough review of empirical evidences from existing higher education CL research, Johnson et al. (2014) suggested three intertwined outcomes of positive interdependence, psychological processes and interactional patterns in CL.

1. High Individual Effort to Achieve – Learners’ individual effort in CL can be indicated by such qualities as the time spent on task, use of cognitive and moral reasoning strategies, intrinsic motivation and expectations for success, creative thinking, transfer of learning, and attitudes toward the task and school.

2. Positive Interpersonal Relationship and Support – Learner behaviors that indicate positive interpersonal relationship and support include interpersonal attraction among individuals, acceptance and mutual respect among students with different backgrounds and abilities (e.g., between learners from minority and majority ethnic groups), engagement in prosocial behavior, and refraining from harm-intended aggression.

3. Positive Psychological Health – In this sense, psychological health or wellbeing refers to the ability to develop, amend and uphold interdependent relationships with others toward successful achievement of mutual goals (Johnson & Johnson, 2004). Researchers have disclosed that CL has significant relationship with and contributions to students’ psychological health (Hanson, Trolian, Paulsen, & Pascarella, 2016; Johnson & Johnson, 2012; Topping, 2005). In this sense, CL is associated with a wide variety of indices of high psychological health including high levels of emotional maturity, well-adjusted social relations, coping with adversity, strong personal identity, trust and optimism toward people, self-confidence, autonomy, and self-esteem.

Incorporating the aforesaid interactional and psychological processes as well as the respective CL outcomes in situations of positive, negative and no social interdependence, Johnson et al. (2014) offered a comprehensive theoretical framework for social interdependence in CL (see Figure 3), which is particularly substantiated through and therefore pertinent to CL research in higher education settings.

Figure 3. Social interdependence theory (Johnson et al., 2014).

Meanwhile, Johnson and Johnson (1983) proposed and validated a classroom life model to assess perceived academic and personal support in CL, while Johnson, Johnson and Anderson (1983) adapted it to measure perceived social interdependence and classroom climate. The model incorporated various classroom life factors including teacher academic and personal support, peer academic and personal support, social interdependence, academic self-esteem, grading fairness, class cohesion, and alienation.

Ghaith (2002) then modified and adapted it for assessing perceived CL and social support in university EFL classrooms; he did so by compatibly condensing the original classroom life factors into teacher academic and personal support, peer academic and personal support, CL, and alienation. In that case, Ghaith’s version is relatively more concise, manageable and, above all, relevant to university EFL classrooms – hence, to the present study – than the original.

3. Methodology

3.1. Design and procedures

This study followed a quantitative research approach with a correlational design as it was set to explain the relationship between IC and CCL (Creswell, 2014). The required data were gathered through adapted Intercultural Competence Scale (ICS) and Classroom Life Measure (CLM) questionnaires. The ICS was adapted from Chao (2014) in line with the IC-EFL-S-HE model by the same author. The original tool consisted of 30 six-point Likert scale items that were validated to measure university EFL learners’ perceived IC. The CLM, on the other hand, had originally been developed by Johnson and Johnson (1983), consisting of 90 five-point Likert scale items with established validity and reliability (Johnson, Johnson & Anderson, 1996). It was then condensed into 38 items for particular application in university EFL classrooms by Ghaith (2002) – hence, adapted for this study due to its precision, manageability and relevance.

Both the ICS and CLM questionnaires were translated into Amharic, the federal official language of Ethiopia widely spoken across the nation. Following researchers’ first translations of the tools, two English language and communication professors, who were also native Amharic speakers, were kindly invited from the English Language and Literature Department of Debre Tabor University to translate the tools back to English. The expert versions were then compared with the original tools, and they were found to be comparable despite minor diction and syntax variations. Of note, the researchers themselves are experienced English language instructors as well as native Amharic speakers; hence, they could further triangulate and refine the translations among themselves to ensure the accuracy of the translations.

The guest professors were also kindly asked to scrutinize and comment on the relevance and precision of the questionnaires to the research. Upon the experts’ feedback and the researchers’ rigorous revision, few modifications were made on the instruments to ensure the relevance and precision of items in both tools vis-à-vis the research questions, context and scope. Accordingly, eight (8) teacher support items in the source CLM questionnaire (Ghaith, 2002) were excluded. This was because the expert reviews highlighted, and the researchers agreed, that teacher factors were not directly relevant to the research questions and scope of this study that are specifically delimited to CCL as experienced and perceived among students. Thus, the teacher factors and associated items had to be excluded to keep the study focused precisely on what it was set to investigate. With the eight teacher items excluded, the remaining thirty (30) CLM items were considered for the final pilot¹.

In addition, the instruments were given to five freshman students in order to obtain their feedbacks on the clarity, simplicity and political correctness of the language use and contents of the adapted tools. The students did not mention any problem with the CLM. They, however, complained that the degree and meaning distinctions in the six-point response index of the ICS are too confusing for them to provide confident responses accordingly. For instance, they had difficulty to surely tell between “3 = slightly disagree” and “2 = slightly agree”. As a result, the six-point scale in the ICS was condensed into a more explicit and convenient five-point scale (5 = strongly agree; 4 = agree; 3 = neutral; 2 = disagree; 1 = strongly disagree). And, the students responded positively when asked if they could easily work with the modified scale. With the five-point scale, all the thirty (30) ICS items were considered for the final test.

Finally, the adapted tools were piloted for reliability on a group of 30 first-year undergraduate students in a comparable public higher education setting, Bahir Dar University. The reliability test showed Cronbach’s alpha scores of α = 0.806 and α = 0.811 for the ICS and CLM respectively. As Tavakol and Dennick (2011) noted, such questionnaires with alpha scores between α = 0.70 and α = 0.95 can be accepted as reliable. Both the ICS and CLM tools were, therefore, considered reliable and implemented in the actual study.

As for the data analysis, Pearson correlation and linear multiple regression were employed via SPSS to respectively compute the relationship and prediction degrees between the independent (IC) and dependent (CLL) variables.

3.2. Population and samples

In Ethiopia, all students who have passed the National University Entrance Examination are accordingly allocated in regular undergraduate programs of public universities across the country by the federal Ministry of Education. Regular classrooms, thus, tend to be more ethnoculturally diverse than those of adjacent (“summer” and “extension”) programs that typically admit self- or institution-sponsored students from local areas or with geographical proximity. Meanwhile, Communicative English Skills is the only EFL course provided for all students across the current higher education curricula, and it is taught as a common course in the first year of undergraduate study. Accordingly, this research was set in Debre Tabor University, one of Ethiopia’s public universities. The list of all first-year, regular, undergraduate students attending Communicative English Skills in the university was obtained from the Common Course Coordinator’s Office such that the list would be the study’s sampling frame and the students the research population.

Simple random sampling technique was then used to select 292 samples from the 1,087 student population, and the sample size was calculated using Taro Yamane’s (1967) formula as follows. $$\text{n=}\frac{\mathrm{N}}{\text{1 + N}\mathrm{(}e\mathrm{)}2}\text{=}\frac{1087}{\text{1 + 1087}\mathrm{(}\text{.0025}\mathrm{)}}\text{=292.4, where n = sample}\mathrm{s},\text{N = population,}e\text{=sampling error}\mathrm{(}\text{0.05}\mathrm{)}.$$

4. Results

4.1. The relationship between perceived IC and CCL among university EFL students

To answer the first research question, the perceived correlations of CCL with the total level and individual factors of IC among the university EFL students were calculated. Accordingly, the correlation results in Table 1 reveal that there exists a statistically significant positive perceived correlation between total IC level and CCL among the students (r = 0.341, p = .000 < .01).

Table 1. Correlation matrix between perceived total IC level and CCL among the university EFL students.

		IC
CCL	Pearson Correlation	.341**
	Sig. (2-tailed)	.000

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Moreover, Table 2 shows that CCL has a statistically significant positive correlation with behavioral performance in intercultural interaction (r = 0.264, p = .000 < .01), knowledge of intercultural interaction (r = 0.243, p = .000 < .01), display of intercultural consciousness (r = 0.219, p = .000 < .01), affective orientation in intercultural interaction (r = 0.198, p = .001 < .01), and self-efficacy in intercultural situations (r = 0.176, p = .003 < .01). That is, CCL is significantly and positively correlated to all of the five IC factors as perceived among the students.

Table 2. Correlation matrix between perceived individual IC factors and CCL among the university EFL students.

		CCL	IK	AO	SE	BP	CD
CCL	Pearson Correlation	1	.243**	.198**	.176**	.264**	.219**
	Sig. (2-tailed)		.000	.001	.003	.000	.000
Intercultural Knowledge (IK)	Pearson Correlation		1	.150*	.333**	.340**	.205**
	Sig. (2-tailed)			.010	.000	.000	.000
Affective Orientation (AO)	Pearson Correlation			1	.474**	.263**	.207**
	Sig. (2-tailed)				.000	.000	.000
Self-efficacy (SE)	Pearson Correlation				1	.386**	.295**
	Sig. (2-tailed)					.000	.000
Behavioural Performance (BP)	Pearson Correlation					1	.355**
	Sig. (2-tailed)						.000
Consciousness Display (CD)	Pearson Correlation						1
	Sig. (2-tailed)

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

It can thus be inferred from the above correlation analysis results that there exists a significant positive relationship between perceived IC and CCL among EFL students in Ethiopian higher education.

4.2. Overall IC level as a perceived predictor of CCL among university EFL students

The regression model in Table 3 reveals that the five predictor variables (IC factors) jointly explained 12.3% of the variation in the dependent variable (CCL), and this prediction effect is found to be statistically significant (R² = 0.123, F (5,286) = 8.00, p = .000 < .05).

Table 3. Regression model summary for the combined contribution of IC factors to the perceived prediction of CCL among the university EFL students.

Model	R	R^2	Adjusted R^2	Std. Error of the Estimate	F Change	Sig. F Change
1	.350^a	.123	.107	11.52654	8.000	.000

^a Predictors: (Constant), IK, AO, SE, BP, CD.

^b Dependent Variable: CCL.

The ANOVA in Table 4 further shows that, with the individual IC factors combined, the overall IC model has a significant positive linear relationship with perceived CCL among the target students (F (5,286) = 8.00, p = .000 < .05).

Table 4. Summary of ANOVA results for the overall perceived prediction effect of IC factors on CCL among the university EFL students.

Model		Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig
1	Regression	5314.212	5	1062.842	8.000	.000^b
	Residual	37998.292	286	132.861
	Total	43312.503	291

^a Dependent Variable: CCL.

^b Predictors: (Constant), IK, AO, SE, BP, CD.

As such, comparable results were also obtained when perceived total IC level (i.e., total score on the ICS as a whole) was analyzed as a predictor variable to perceived CCL among the sample EFL students. Accordingly, the regression results in Table 5 show that students’ perceived total IC significantly positively predicted their perceived CCL (β = 0.318, t = 6.172, p = .000 < .05).

Table 5. Summary of the regression results for total IC level as a perceived predictor of CCL among the university EFL students.

Model		Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig	95.0% Confidence Interval for B
		B	Std. Error	Beta			Lower Bound	Upper Bound
1	(Constant)	64.877	5.182		12.519	.000	54.677	75.077
	IC	.318	.051	.341	6.172	.000	.216	.419

^a Dependent Variable: CCL.

Altogether, answering the second research question, the multiple regression analysis findings assert that overall IC level is a significant positive perceived predictor of CCL among university EFL students in Ethiopia.

4.3. Contributions of individual IC factors to the perceived prediction of CCL among university EFL students

To answer the third research question, the degree of perceived individual contributions of the five IC factors to the prediction of CCL among the university EFL students was computed using multiple regression analysis, the results of which are shown in Table 6 above. Accordingly, learners’ knowledge of intercultural interaction was found to have relatively the highest significant contribution to the prediction of CCL (β = 0.399, t = 2.628, p = .009 < .05), followed by behavioral performance in intercultural interaction (β = 0.377, t = 2.277, p = .024 < .05) and affective orientation in intercultural interaction (β = 0.351, t = 1.974, p = .049 < .05), respectively. However, relatively insignificant contribution levels were recorded for display of intercultural consciousness (β = 0.325, t = 1.926, p = .055 > .05) and self-efficacy in intercultural situations (β = −0.137, t = −0.404, p = .686 > .05).

Table 6. Summary of regression results for individual contributions of IC factors to the perceived prediction of CCL among the university EFL students.

Model		Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients	t	Sig	95.0% Confidence Interval for B
		B	Std. Error	Beta			Lower Bound	Upper Bound
1	(Constant)	63.510	5.436		11.684	.000	52.811	74.209
	IK	.399	.152	.159	2.628	.009	.100	.698
	AO	.351	.178	.125	1.974	.049	.001	.701
	SE	−.137	.338	−.028	−.404	.686	−.802	.529
	BP	.377	.166	.146	2.277	.024	.051	.703
	CD	.325	.221	.116	1.926	.055	−.009	.860

^a Dependent Variable: CCL.

Hence, one can draw from the results of the regression analysis here that knowledge, behavioral performance and affective orientation in intercultural interaction have significantly positive individual contributions to the perceived prediction of CCL among the target university EFL students, and yet intercultural consciousness display and self-efficacy do not relatively have significant contributions to this effect.

5. Discussion

The first research question sought to determine if there is any significant relationship between perceived IC and CCL among university EFL learners in Ethiopia. The results of the Pearson correlation analysis have asserted that CCL has a significant positive perceived relationship with overall IC level as well as with all of the individual IC factors among the target EFL students. Then, in the second and third research questions, the study respectively tested whether IC is a significant perceived predictor of CCL among EFL learners in Ethiopian higher education, and the degree to which individual IC factors contribute to this effect. Accordingly, the findings of the linear multiple regression analysis have confirmed that overall IC level is a statistically significant and positive perceived predictor of CCL among the university EFL students, where intercultural knowledge, behavioral performance and affective orientation significantly contribute to this effect as individual IC factors. These findings imply that learners’ IC development can significantly and positively contribute to or influence cooperative EFL learning and classroom life in culturally diverse higher education contexts.

Apparently, there exists lack of comparable prior research explaining the significance of IC as a predictor of CCL in university EFL classrooms. Still, adding emphasis to the present findings, some related works implied that effective development and demonstration of IC can positively contribute to interpersonal relations and cooperative classroom environment among foreign language learners. High competence in intercultural communication promotes effective learning and cooperation (Reid & Garson, 2019), positive psychological wellbeing (Balakrishnan et al., 2022), active interpersonal engagement and interaction (Byram, 2021; Byram et al., 2002; Spencer-Oatey & Franklin, 2009), negotiation and accommodation skills (Holiday, 2013), decision-making quality (Poort et al., 2019), and so on in intercultural group learning. In that case, ensuring effective intercultural communication through heterogeneous group structures is critical in CL pedagogy (Borich, 2011; Reid & Garson, 2019; Stahl, 1994; Tammaro & Merlino, 2015).

Nevertheless, having students learn in culturally diverse groups does not guarantee effective intercultural communication and CL, even where students have certain intercultural knowledge and experiences (EQUiiP, 2019; Lee et al., 2012; Poort et al., 2019). Other context-specific factors such as cultural beliefs and attitudes (Huang et al., 2012; Okech et al., 2015), cultural group preferences (Cotton et al., 2013), close peers’ experience and influence (Kimmel & Volet, 2012), individual differences (Dombi, 2021), teachers’ social and psychological support (Jackson et al., 2013), teaching culture and materials (Kim, 2020; Marwa et al., 2021), etc. should also be taken into consideration.

6. Implications

The findings of this study offer fresh insights and implications for cooperative EFL learning theory, pedagogy and research in intercultural higher education settings, as follows.

Attesting IC as a significant predictor of cooperative EFL learning and classroom life, the study’s findings set a new direction to the prevailing reverse relationship between the two in which IC is rather an outcome. This, in turn, call for the contemplation of IC as a determining CL factor in higher education FLT theory and research. Upon further research, the social interdependence theory may also consider adding IC as the sixth CL element alongside positive interdependence, promotive interaction, individual accountability, social skills, and group processing.

The findings also encourage practitioners of EFL teaching and teacher education in intercultural university settings to nurture learners’ development and application of IC toward successful CL and classroom life. In support, evidences from existing CL research suggest that, for CL to successfully uphold positive interdependence and desired learning outcomes in culturally diverse classrooms, students need to be trained how to develop and demonstrate effective social and cultural competences in group work; if not, merely putting learners in groups and expecting them to cooperate effectively can end up in vain (EQUiiP, 2019; Johnson & Johnson, 2012; Jones et al., 2021; Reid & Garson, 2019; Tammaro & Merlino, 2015).

Understanding IC and its relationship with learning takes more than statistical explanations (Griffith et al., 2016). In this case, the quantitative findings of this study call for further in-depth exploration of underlying factors, experiences and relations that shape cooperative EFL learning and classroom life in the given intercultural university context. To this effect, qualitative and mixed methods studies are needed. Moreover, experimental and quasi-experimental studies aiming to measure the effect of IC on cooperative EFL learning and classroom life or related outcomes can carefully draw empirically informed alternate hypotheses from this study – example: Provision of IC training can significantly improve CCL among university EFL students.

7. Conclusion

This study is set to explain the role of IC as a predictor of CCL among EFL students in Ethiopian higher education. As per the research questions, IC’s perceived relationship with and prediction effect on CCL among the students are statistically measured. It is concluded based on the findings that IC has a significant positive perceived relationship with and prediction effect on CCL among university EFL students, where intercultural knowledge, affective orientation and behavioral performance have significantly positive individual contributions to this effect.

It follows that developing learners’ IC can both significantly and positively contribute to successful cooperative EFL learning and classroom life in Ethiopian higher education and other comparable FLT contexts. University EFL teachers and teacher educators are thus recommended to provide IC trainings for students as well as to incorporate, in their instruction and materials, relevant cultural contents that promote learners’ intercultural knowledge, affective orientation and behavioral performance. More importantly, in accordance with the realities and changes in their respective contexts, higher education institutions and FLT practitioners ought to explore and adapt alternative ways of developing learners’ IC towards ensuring successful CCL.

It also follows that IC should be considered, both in theory and research, as an integral element and determinant of cooperative EFL learning and classroom life. It should, however, be noted that the evidence of IC as a significant predictor of cooperative EFL learning in this study does not necessarily contradict or invalidate existing views of IC as an outcome thereof. On the contrary, we propose a hypothetical Co-relation approach in that the relationship of IC with cooperative EFL learning and classroom life tends to be reciprocal rather than unidirectional. More research is still required to test and expand on this hypothesis.

Meanwhile, as a correlational quantitative research, this study is confined to providing statistical explanations regarding IC’s perceived relationship with and prediction effect on CCL among university EFL students in Ethiopia. It does not further provide detailed accounts of how such a significant relationship between IC and CCL – where the former predicts the later – is shaped through the intercultural beliefs, preferences and experiences of the students. Other potential factors beyond students (e.g. teacher support, culture teaching, materials, etc.) are not also included in the study. Future researchers in the area are thus highly encouraged to deeply explore the underlying social, psychological and pedagogical factors that shape cooperative EFL learning and classroom life across different intercultural higher education settings.

Acknowledgements

The authors express their gratitude to the participants of the pilot and main study for providing the required information and data, to Dr. Behailu Atinafu and Dr. Antehun Atanaw for offering the reverse-translations and expert feedback in adapting the instruments, and to the Common Course Coordination Office of Debre Tabor University for allowing access to the student records used as the study’s sampling frame.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Zelealem Shitahun Haregu

Zelealem Shitahun is a doctoral candidate in Bahir Dar University. He also works as EFL lecturer and teacher educator in Debre Tabor University. His current research activities relate to foreign language learning across cultures. He particularly explores the constructs and outcomes of IC in cooperative EFL learning and classroom life at indigenous higher education settings, Ethiopia emphasized.

Abiy Yigzaw Filatie

Prof. Abiy Yigzaw Filatie is a senior professor and post-graduate program coordinator in the Department of English Language and Literature, Bahir Dar University. He has been teaching and advising undergraduate and post-graduate students for over three decades now. His research engagements encompass a wide range of topics including mediation, CL, testing, and teacher training in FLT.

Birhanu Simegn Chanie

Dr. Birhanu Simegn is an associate professor in the Department of English Language and Literature, Bahir Dar University, where he teaches and advises undergraduate and post-graduate students. His research interests include teaching writing and related communicative skills.

Notes

1 We further observed some inconsistencies in previous uses of the CLM. The last ten “alienation” items (29-38) in Ghaith’s (2002) modified version are not, in fact, entirely peculiar to alienation, which Ghaith described as “learners’ feelings of estrangement from school, peers and classroom activities” (p. 266). Some of the items indicate other psychological and academic traits including self-esteem (e.g., “Whenever I take a test I am afraid I would fail”) and fairness (e.g., “If a student works hard, he/she can definitely succeed”). In fact, in an early use of the tool, Johnson et al. (1983) applied the same items for separate factors; e.g., the items “I am not doing as well in school as I would like to”, “School work is fairly easy for me”, “Whenever I take a test I am afraid I will fail”, and “I am a good student” are repeatedly used to measure “Academic self-esteem” and “Alienation”, which are then merged under the latter factor in Ghaith’s version. Such indices of psychological CL outcomes, alienation and self-esteem included, are yet collectively considered and justified as psychological health in subsequent social interdependence theory and CL research (Johnson et al., 2014). Despite the relatively faint role of the CLM sub-divisions when analyzed as a whole such as in the case of CCL in this study, we strongly suggest that researchers who are to adapt the tool for detailed CL assessments and factor analysis should take these issues into careful consideration.