I found it interesting that Bennett discussed the differences between monocultural communication and intercultural communication. Monocultural communications is similarity-based, while intercultural communication is difference-based. This made me realize things I take for granted in my everyday, monocultural life, as people I interact with daily use the same language, behavior patterns and have the same values as me (for the most part), which allows a certain level of comfort in daily interactions. Bennett also focused on Culture and culture. Most people (myself included) think of culture as Culture (objective, creates knowledge, social, economic, political and linguistic systems, art, literature, music) and neglect culture (“the learned and shared patterns of beliefs, behaviors, and values of groups of interacting people”) (Bennett, 3).

Vande Berg focused on the three paradigms of positivism, relativism, and experiential / constructivism, which are considered master narratives for viewing studying abroad. The positivist narrative involves learning through experience and believes that merely being exposed to the new and the different can have effects (though the greater the language competency is, the greater the potential outcomes). Within the positivist narrative, there is the idea of almost absorbing things from “privileged places” and “becoming more seasoned, refined, and cultivated as they come into contact with the types of sophisticated people who live there” (Vande Berg,16). I found this phrasing very interesting, as it positions the destination countries as superior human societies, but I think that even studying abroad in a place not considered “‘civilized’” could be beneficial for a student (Vande Berg, 16). The relativist narrative focuses on learning through being immersed and engaged in a new and different and it gives the student responsibility for their own learning. The experiential / constructivist paradigm also emphasizes immersion and has the student as their own agent of learning but isn’t always to blame if they come back untransformed. It also focuses on ongoing transactions with the environment and well-timed, purposeful educator intervention. I believe that the experiential / constructivist paradigm is more well-rounded and concentrates on an ultimate goal (of developing “in ways that allow students to learn to shift cultural perspective and to adapt their behavior to other cultural contexts”) that is more realistic and takes into account different factors (Vande Berg, 18).

I found it interesting that Jennie discussed the perspective of someone who had already studied abroad. Jennie was ultimately underwhelmed by Vande Berg’s ideas and arguments and questioned the lack of acknowledgement for “the human experience involved in study abroad”. Jennie also focused on how habits and natural tendencies will seep through your interactions, whether it’s while you’re at home or while you’re studying abroad. I hadn’t thought that much about it, but I agree that “communication habits are fairly ingrained in us by the time college students study abroad”. Even though I haven’t studied abroad yet, I often forget to adjust the way I communicate in different situations while remaining in the same culture and language (ex. More formal situations (presentations, interviews) and more casual situations (friends, family)).