Barnga- An Intercultural Communication Game

I found this activity on-line and was excited to use it in class during the 3rd week of the ICC class. The focus of the week is to look at other cultures and how we might encounter and communicate with them. The game was hilarious to watch, and appealed greatly to my slightly malicious nature. Why? Well, I'll tell you about the game.

You give each group of students (4-6) an altered deck of cards, containing the aces, and only the 2 through 7 cards of each suit. You then give them a set of rules and instructions and tell them to learn the rules together in their groups. The game is simple, each hand just goes around once, the student who has the highest number card in the suit that is originally played is the winner. For example, if I put down a 3 of spades, then you should put down your 5 of spades, and everyone else should put down spades as well. The highest spade wins. Except there is a "trump" card- that is, one entire suit is a trump. For example, diamonds may be the trump cards, so if I lay down any diamond it will win the hand. But, somebody can come along and trump my trump if they have a diamond of a higher number. When you win a hand, you get all of the cards, and the next hand is played.

After the groups got comfortable playing the games, there was laughter and general happiness at playing a game; as opposed to reading theory from Edward T. Hall. Once they were really comfy, I told them that there was going to be a tournament, and that the winners and second place, third place, etc. would play each other at a table after the first round of the tournament. The new rule that I added was that now everyone has to be silent when they are playing. So the card playing resumed, this time in relative silence, perforated by outbursts of laughter, frustration, and beating on tables.

After a few rounds the winners and places are established and students change tables and are with students from different groups. Here's the kicker: all of the rules from group to group have been slightly modified so that they are all different in some very important way- like aces are high or low depending on your rules, or diamonds or spades are trumps. Very early on, once the cards are shuffled and dealt, the chaos begins! Students are reaching for hands they've obviously won only to find them quickly grabbed up by another player, or somebody inexplicably throws down a spade when you are playing hearts (and the trump is diamonds). Arguments are mounting, yet they are under strict instruction to remain silent. Pretty soon, they try and appeal to me to referee something, but I just hold up my hands, trying to conceal my inner jubilant joy at seeing the students so helplessly frustrated! I walk around looking as innocent and ignorant as possible, as the exasperation, the frustration, the leaping across tables, the slamming of fists, the sighs of surrender, the mumbling and pointing at cards, and general pandemonium takes hold.

Alas, eventually things start to settle down. Some groups give up and stop playing, just staring at their tables. Other groups abandon the game completely and make a new game, somehow, silently. Still other groups negotiate through gestures and fall on a new establishment of rules for the same game. When the games finished, I award the winners with chocolate, and send them on a break.

Now, the crazy thing about this game is that it is not just entertaining for the teacher. Just seeing students struggle, get flustered, and lose their minds without talking....well, that would make the whole exercise worth it by itself. But, amazingly, there is some deep learning opportunities here as well.

So, when they came back from the break, there were three journal reflection questions on the board:

What happened during the game?

What was your reaction when playing with a new group?

How was this game like intercultural communication?

I then had them reflect silently and write for ten minutes in the journal before coming together in small groups to discuss their answers. Finally, we shared our answers with the big group.

The first question gets students thinking about what exactly went wrong. Some understand that the rules were different. Others might think that the rules were interpreted differently, and therefore they had the "right" interpretation and were frustrated that others could goof it up so bad. Others think that some students were trying to cheat. Others felt like their peers were hopeless doofbags who couldn't do anything right. But most in my case realized at some point that the rules were different, and that I, innocent me, was the master duper.

The second question gets students to reflect on how they reacted. Did they force their rules on the others. Were they adamant that they were right and others were wrong? Or were they passive. Did they just give up and go with the flow? Or did they work to negotiate with their peers, as hard as it might be, through wild gesturing and grunting? The answers might be quite telling!

The third question gets them to think about how we are cultural beings and how we learn one set of "rules"- either explicit or implicit, through our home cultures. When we enter a new culture we inevitably carry these rules with us, and often can become perplexed, frustrated, exasperated, upset, even angry when these rules seem to mean nothing to the people in the new context. In Korea, for example, the unspoken rule that we say "Excuse me." when we bump into people is usually not expected and thus is forgone. This may have a lot to do with limited space, closer allowances for proximity, and the sheer frequency of bumping into people (believe me, it happens ALL the time). Whatever the reason is, it is not in the rule-book of the culture here to utter an apology every time you bump into someone. In the U.S. however, not uttering a quick "excuse me" can win you a whole bouquet of four letter nouns and adjectives, and maybe the added bonus of a broken nose. I have tried and tried to undo this learning while here, and 99.9% of the time my thoughts are pure after some ajumma bumps me out of the way on her straight-arrow-don't care-who's-in-the-way-route to the empty seat on the subway. I'm not perfectly there yet, but one day, God willing, I'll be cured of slandering little old ladies with a slew of insults that would make hardened criminals blush, all in my mind of course. Anyways, we learn that there are variations on how we do this life thing from culture to culture. Forcing our own rules on people in the cultural context is both futile and unhealthy. Being frustrated and confused is normal and healthy and should be a starting point for negotiating, learning, understanding, and respecting the rules of the new group. One of the students said humility is needed when entering a new culture. Another said that we have to learn the ideas and rules of a new culture to get along with them. Yet another said that through negotiation and communicating harmony could be achieved, just as in the game. My heart was beaming with pride.

If you are an edumacator this activity is indispensable. Rarely does the joy of torturing students, fun, and real learning blend so perfectly together in such a delightful cornucopia of pedagogical goodness. Just get the activity started, sit back, and enjoy the chaos.

http://yeoresources.org/Documents/Files/Barnga.pdf

Reflection Week 2

Just finished week 2 of the Intercultural Communication Class. Just 7 more classes left, and we are just scratching the surface. We only had two classes this week, so it was a limited time to cover a lot. I've also realized what it means to have to read and make conscientious comments on 68 journals, two entries a piece. Wow, I just finished that. Well, let's look back at what happened.

Monday, I told the students that we would be doing the reading in class, breaking it up, and having small groups read, discuss, and teach the class about their particular section of the reading. The reading was I, We, and They by Geert Hofstede, and the subject was Collectivist cultures and Individualist cultures, and how these translated into behavior in the home and with the family, at school and in social functions, and at work. I was pretty pleased with what the groups came up with in their understanding, but wasn't to pleased that as they taught their sections, the other groups seemed to fade, fade away into the daydreamy world. To counter this, I asked the students to answer the questions provided in the book. I think next time I will have them answer the questions, slap their names on them, and give them to me for checking at he end of class just to give them that extra little extrinsic motivation that they seemed to need.

We discussed how more collective cultures can be more high context, in which much of what is being communicated already exists in the environments. I was hard-pressed to explain this, so I used the story of my riding in a subway early on in my tenure in Korea and being utterly fascinated with a phone conversation that an older- probably in his 60's- ajjoshi was having over the phone that went like this:

(answers the phone:)

auhhhhh (grunts)

aughhhh

augh augh augh

aughhhh

augh aughhhh

augh augh aughhhhhhh (with final rising intonation to indicate the phone call was finished).

I was in complete awe of how a conversation could go like that. He didn't say one word, but in his grunts was all the meaning the person on the other end needed in order to successfully communicate. I'm assuming the other person was "beneath" them in age and thus didn't warrant any honorifics, or intelligible words for that matter. And that is just it. The context was very high: he was an older man, and the person speaking with him used the proper honorifics and questions. He, on the other hand, just needed to give small verbal grunts, cues to indicate that he heard and understood. And that was it. No need for a lot of details, no need for spelling things out. The meaning was in the relationship.

This is a funny illustration, but it still didn't clearly define it, so I used the example from the book about contracts, at how long and tedious they are back home in the west and how short and simple they seemingly are over here. That's because we need everything spelled out for us through the words in the U.S. We are low-context, high code communicators. We need to know the exact parameters of any given situation and the anomolies and by-laws of any given situation should it occur. In Korea, they are shorter. That's because, if there is a problem or misunderstanding, it will go through the proper channels of the hierarchy to be figured out and changed. If I'm a starting level employee my parameters are defined by the people above me, I'll do what they say. If I don't like it in the end, then I may quit; but to have any decision power at this point in the game is ridiculous.

Another example I used was small talk. In the west, we normally don't feel comfortable sitting in silence, so we've perfected the art of chit chatting. In a really high context society, silence may be often preferred. Why is there any reason to say anything, after all. Most things you need to know are in the environment and in the relationships that you have.

Collectivism and Individualism were discussed in the family settings. In the individualistic societies, we are taught to stand on our feet, we live in nuclear families, and we learn the concept of "I" and "my" at a very young age. I had my own room growing up. I had my own toys. My identity was distinctly different from that of my brothers. In a collective household, a person might live in a crowded house, complete with Grandparents, great-grandparents, possibly some aunts or uncles thrown in, maybe a cousin is there for the summer. In the collective household, there isn't any of the "my" business. It is "our" all the way, and the child thus learns to thing of himself as "we". Think of how this translates into language. Where do I live? My house. I am the father of my children. My parents are my parents. In Korea, everything is our: 우리집 (our house) 우리아들 (our son), and Jina, even though she doesn't share me with anybody else, calls me 우리남편 (our husband)!

In the individualistic home, confrontations do and will occur. And when they do, it usually isn't a disaster. We value working stuff out, having discussions around the dinner table, and even yelling and slamming doors on occassion. Why? Because this is the nature of life. People disagree. It's best, according to our culture, to talk this things through, maybe see the other's point of view, and reach a final decision. Argument can often be beneficial and healthy when we make it to the other side. Arguments between parents and children are not a problem, although the parents usually win. But the kids won't accept the old traditional response of "Because I'm the parent and I said so!" That just won't fly anymore. Parents have to have a more solid argument with reason, logic, and the facts to back it up.

Totally opposite in the collective world. Confrontation, especially with your elders, is disastrous, leads to "losing face", and can often tear families apart. If you disagree with your father or mother, its best to bite your lip, nod, and comply. And if you don't comply, then at least pretend to in their presence. Take this story from the reading as an example:

A dutch missionary was in Indonesia telling a parable from the book of Matthew to the locals. In the parable, Jesus recounts the story of a farmer with two sons. he asks his first son, "Go and work in the vineyard." The first son answers in the affirmative, but then goes off and doesn't work. The father asks the second son the same thing. the second son replies, "No, I won't do it." But later on, he changes his mind, and goes and works in the vineyard. After Jesus tells the parable, he asks his disciples, "Which son did the will of the father?" Of course, the biblical answer would be the second. I think the lesson being that you shouldn't worship with your lips if you're not going to worship with your heart and your actions, and that it is considered better to rebel and then repent than comply with empty words. Anyhow, the Indonesians surprised the missionary by saying that the first son did the will of the father because he answered in the affirmative, thus preserving the authority of the father and the ultimate harmony of the household. That son could later be admonished and forgiven for not doing the work, the Indonesians reasoned, but the second son committed the ultimate, unforgivable act of open rebellion against the father, thus destroying the harmony of the family.

Interesting stuff.

Anyways, we also discussed in class other variations of individual and collective behaviors in the workplace, and at school, which I won't go into here. The journal assignment this weekend will be:

1. Ask your roommate about their family life. Does it resemble a collective family more or a individualistic family? Ask them to give examples and write a paragraph about that. (100 words)

2. Then write about your own family. (100 words)

Reflection

The first week of classes is done, now it's Friday and I'm sitting at a coffee shop and trying to prepare for the week ahead, but first going over the week ahead. What did we learn? What did we do? What was successful? What didn't go over so well?

Well, firstly, we covered a lot of ground over the question of what culture is. I think that the students were able to brainstorm and think deeply about what culture is, while learning that there is a lot of things that are "invisible" that make up the more visible parts of the culture- things like gender roles, social relations, hierarchy, collective or independent, "doing" or "being", religious influences, economy, history, philosophy, ways of dealing with confrontations, communication styles, and on and on. We can say that these are invisible because they couldn't be learned unless someone spends time in the culture and learns the ways of that culture. The visible things are the things that are obvious and more tangible to the senses- the music, clothing, some parts of the language (while others are hidden until you begin to learn the language, like formalities, etc.) We learned this through looking at culture as an iceberg, the small top part being visible, but underneath the surface a large "hidden" world within a world.

The last thing that we learned through the reading was based on the Kluckholn and Strodbeck reading, and that was about orientations: activity, social relations, and self. The other two which we have not yet covered are World Orientation and Time Orientation, which I'll discuss now.

World Orientation poses these four questions:

- Are human beings intrinsically good? Well, if you look at the Judeo Christian book of Genesis, we can safely say that in the west the prevailing idea is that we screwed up big time, and that deep down we are bad, even though we are at heart Children of God. Judaism and the Torah give us the law, so that we can know how to once again live right and be justified before God. Christ comes along and through His death we are justified, all of our transgressions died with Christ on the Cross, and that we are redeemed through faith in Him. So, starting with these stories, I assume that most people in the West and beyond believe that we are bad, or we have the potential for a lot of evil within us, and that it is through an outside force like Grace in which we can be washed clean.

Many others would claim secular humanism as their belief system, and might say that we have the potential for both good and bad and that it's a choice. So, the prevailing idea in the west is that we do have at least some potential for evil at heart.

Along side this, Westerners tend to see themselves apart from nature, and actually believe they have the ability to manipulate, protect themselves from, and control for their our benefit. God said in the Bible that man will have dominion over all things.

Genesis 1:26

Then God said, "Let us make human beings in our image, to be like us. They will reign over the fish in the sea, the birds in the sky, the livestock, all the wild animals on the earth, and the small animals that scurry along the ground."

If we look at this belief held at a deep cultural level, it may explain a lot of things that have occurred throughout our brief history on the planet>> agriculture>> leisure time>> stocking up for winter >>> shift from hunter gatherer to more sedentary dwellers >>> village>> town>> city. It seems the story of the westerner has been a long one that seeks to master the elements with good effect (technology, longer living, convenience) coupled with often and ongoing ill effect (pollution, cancer?, global warming). A good book to read and check out on this subject is the fictional book called "Ishmael" which shows our history as moving us closer and closer towards rendering the earth uninhabitable.

In other societies, particularly African and Native American among many others, there is belief in God, man, and nature, and that God is at the top of this triangle, and that we are following God when we are living in harmony with the universe (God, nature, man) (Daniel and Smitherman). One like look at the "primitive" societies of the world of the soon to be past and see that in their mode of existence there was very little destruction of the natural resources in the name of progress.

The second question asks, "Are humans different from other animals and plants? In some cultures maybe less so than in most of ours.

3. Are people in control of, subjugated by, or living in harmony with the forces of nature?

4. Do spirits of the dead inhabit and effect the human world? When I was in Brazil I saw a Candomble ceremony in which adherents were in turn "possessed" by the spirits of various gods, which compelled them to dance, drink, and take on new identities for a brief period where they would drink from large beer bottles and smoke giant cigars or cigarettes. In Haiti it is common knowledge among people that dead people walk the earth as zombies and there are few who question this; in fact it is a law that you cannot raise the dead in Haiti. In the States, most are skeptical of anyone who claims that they have seen a ghost.

The final Orientation that Kluckholn and Strodbeck cover is that of Time:

1. How should time be valued?

2. Is time a scarce resource or is it unlimited?

3. Is the desirable pace of life fast or slow?

4. is time linear or cyclical? In the Chrisitian belief, God created the universe, and that one day it will end. In Buddhism. Inca, Mayan, and Greek concepts, time is cyclical, meaning it is like a wheel and that time will repeat again in the future. The ancients could look to the seasons, the waxing and the waning of the moon, to see that all things have no true beginning or ending, but just cycles.

I was thinking about time and culture today as I was pretty bummed at myself for having wasted time getting out of the house. It was three O'clock and I hadn't managed to get much accomplished. Me being from the supposed "Doing" culture, this didn't sit well. I silently cursed and rushed out of the house to salvage what I could of the day. In my book, a day is wasted unless I get out of the house, get some reading, do some exercise, and get a little work in there for good measure. I gotta be doing something. But then it struck me, why aren't I thankful for this time that I could just waste? Why shouldn't I just bask in the fact that I got NOTHING done, but just relaxed, piddle paddled around, and enjoyed the morning as it stretched into lunch and the early afternoon? Is it because I view time as linear, with the day ending, never again to be returned to me? If I don't do it now, I'll never get that time back, and maybe that's why I feel a little guilty or stressed when I do nothing (which is more often than I care to say). My culture is replete with sayings about time: The early bird gets the worm; don't waste time; I don't have enough time; time flies. We are obsessed with the ticking of the clock and the ever forward push towards death.

In Korea, there is a constant sense of "Bally bally!" where everyone is in a rush to get to where they are going. You can see this in the driving, in the rush to catch trains, even in the steps of the old. I'm of the opinion that this comes from it being a spatially small country with lots of people and if you are ever going to get what you need then you need to hurry up and beat the others. It's like this in most big cities I guess, whereas in the country time seems to slow down and becomes less pressing. In Korea, I like to say that people are in a hurry to wait. People move so fast, yet they are always slaves to traffic lights, trains not yet arrived, and traffic and human jams that build up. You can see this in the way people spped toward a red light, slowing down at the last moment to wait for the light that never seems to change. The sale of brake pads must be a good business here.

Yet Korea has a huge connection with the past, and values the past just as the Chinese and Japanese do. During "Chuseok" the Korean equivalent of Thanksgiving, families come together to pay the respect to their dead, and they often visit the graves. Since the fifties, however, and the 5 year and 10 year plans set out by Park Chung Hee, the Korean mind has been very much geared for the future and the prosperity that it may bring.

Stuckholn and Strodbeck say that Latinos and Native Americans are more focused on the present. I think that this is something that many of us future-minded folk are beginning to aspire to. Living in the presence. Carpe Diem. If time is not real, then the future and the past are not even there, just memories and hopes. the true moment is now, and it is really the only time to get things done. We may remember and smile, we may plan and organize, but it is only now in which things can be done.

S and S put European Americans in the future oriented place, saying that we are governed by "clocks, appointments, and schedules." p.101 In order to make a schedule, appointment, or plan, then they have to be thinking of the future. I imagine that living in the present would appear more spontaneous. A visitor might show up at your house unannounced, or in today's cellphone-saturated world, you might get more calls out of the blue to meet or talk, rather than scheduling appointments courteously ahead. In Korea, work related activities are often announced with little or no time ahead, and just as easily cancelled. It can drive a westerner crazy.

The things that went well in class this week: cover of culture, deep thinking of one's own culture

things that went bad: too little explanation of being, becoming, and doing cultures; poor debriefing of the orientations test that I gave them; one that I created and the results were rather random and varied and did not at all show what I wished the to show, that different cultures might answer the questions differently and that students from the same culture would have similar answers and scores, which they really didn't.

Next week: Finishing the Strodbeck reading, answering the questions, getting into collective and individual cultures, watching My Big Fat Greek Wedding, and more....

Cultural Orientations

Cultural Orientations:

I made the following little quiz based on the reading we did from Kluckholn and Strodbeck's Value Orientations. this is based on only three of the values orientations: activity, social relations, and self orientations.

Cultural Orientation Quiz: Choose one of the following answers which best describes you.

A: 1. I think that hard work is the best way to improve my life. I think, “Where there is a will, there is a way.” Life has many challenges, but I can overcome the challenges with hard work.

2. I want to find a good job that is stable. I want to be happy in my work and get along well with my co-workers, employers, or employees.

B: 1: I think that being successful means doing your best in life and achieving many things. It would be nice to have wealth or some kind of recognition in my field. Successful people are really good at what they do, often times they are the best at what they do.

2.: Success means having a lot of harmony at your work with people. If I get along with people well, I work hard and do a good job, and am happy in my job, I will be successful. Successful people are people who work well with others.

C: 1: On the weekend, I prefer to get out of the house, meet friends, do something fun. I travel a lot, and am always looking for new and exciting experiences.

2: On the weekend, I prefer to rest and relax at home. I will spend some time with my family, maybe see a movie with friends, or get coffee near my house.

D: 1. I sometimes call my university professors by their first name, and some of them have asked me to do so.

2. I usually call my university professors by their title and maybe their family name.

E: 1. I don't often hang out with my friends from middle school. (junior high) We don't keep in touch.

2. I still meet my friends from middle school (junior high) from time to time. We sometimes meet as a group.

F: 1. I change friends fairly often and meet new people all the time.

2. I keep friends for a long time from my school, my club, my church, etc.

G: 1. I have had had many best friends in my life.

2. I have had just a couple or a few best friends in my life.

H: 1. If I am angry, I think it is best to face the person and tell them my feelings and why I am angry.

2. If I am angry with someone, I usually think it is best to just try and forget about it and move on.

I: 1. I usually make the most important decisions in my life with some or little help from other people.

2. I usually listen to my family and friends when I am making a big decision in my life.

J: 1. I think that youth is the most important thing in our society. New ideas and innovation are more important than tradition.

2. I think that old age is very important in our society. Our elders and seniors know a lot and we can learn a lot from them to help our future.

K: 1. My own creativity is very important. I like being different from others. Being different is what makes the world interesting. I can get along with others even if they are different.

2. Having group harmony is very important. I am happiest when I am in my club or with my school group. We have many things in common, like fashion, music tastes, same hobbies, etc.

Score: ___________________

1. The idea behind this quiz is to get students to think about the values that they carry and how these can be in large part influenced by the cultures in which we live. It is quite easy to assume that our assumptions about things like work and play, social relations, and our concepts of self identity would be universal; but it is quite to the contrary. think about important maxims of our societies. In America, we like to say, "different strokes for different folks" meaning in part that all people are unique and have many differences and that this essentially a good thing. In Korea, there is a saying that the nail that sticks up must be hammered back down. This is referring to someone who gets too far ahead of his contemporaries and colleagues and therefore must be humiliated or brought down a level, but it also hints to the Korean idea of collectivism- that we are stronger in things that make us the same, not the things that make us different. The easy trap to fall into is to think that one way of thinking is by definition is better than the other. I've met many foreigners in Korea who just can't let go of the notion that whatever is different in Korea is backwards or wrong. I get frustrated sometimes and think the same kinds of thoughts. It is too easy to do.

Of course, there are pros and cons to all the value orientations, no matter where they are, and I think that communication could be helped immensely if we enter a culture and truly investigate what good things come from thinking a certain way.

For example, Koreans value being similar and being part of the group. This is really a part of the "let's go together" (같이가자) spirit that pervades here. The pros of this are obvious:

support, a sense of belonging and community, less "who am I" identity anxiety that we seem to have a lot of in the west, fast-made, long lasting friendships.

The cons?: less room for creativity and innovation, being outcasted for being too different, slow to change

Forgive me for just glossing over that quickly, but I just want to illustrate the point that there are both pros and cons to most of the value assumptions we have and it would be foolish to think that "our" way is the best. There is alway rooms for improvement and change in every culture, and the idea that good intercultural communication training can help in just that is exciting.

2. Another idea that I want to point out to students is that you can answer quite differently depending on your own upbringing, your own situation, and your own psychological stirrings and that the answers within a culture should and will differ. There are no "right and wrong" answers, and you may answer "being" for one and "doing" for another, or you may have scored more in the "being" range but are actually from a "doing" culture or vice verse. This exercise isn't precise nor scientifically tested (I made it up!), so the answers might not reflect the dominant assumptions of our societies. But in the least it will get us thinking about our own value assumptions and where they come from.

3. After the students take these quizzes, I want them to get together in multi-cultural groups and discuss their answers. They can talk about where they fall and where they would honestly say that their own cultures fall. Then they should make a visual representation of this and share it with the class.

4. I also want to make group project groups and introduce ideas for a group project: movie, presentation, skit, music song, etc. The presentations will be shown and performed on the last day of class of the last week.

Homework: Finish reading the Kluckholn and Strodbeck, focusing on World Orientation and Time Orientation.

Journal Questions: What is culture? 150 words

Describe my home culture using the iceberg model and orientations. 300 words

5 Assumptions

In this class, we will continue to examine what are the visible parts of ourice berg and what the invisible parts are. I will start the students in their homogeneous groups, drawing a physical representation of their country's cultural iceberg. After they have completed this activity, they will give a short presentation and I'll hang the posters in the classroom. I really want to stress again at this point is that culture is learned, and that without people to learn it from, we would be culture-less, and therefore, almost non-human, which raises a lot of questions about what it means to be human.

The second part of the class we will get into the reading about "Five Cultural Assumptions". Within our own cultures, we hold that our views and ideas about these things are true, at least we hold others within the culture to these truths. The assumptions are:

1. Activity: How active should someone be in life, both in work and play? How do we measure a person's success? What does it mean to live a good life? Is improving your life valued or is accepting your status and position valued?

2. Social relations: Is equality or hierarchy stressed? Does language reflect a person's status. Is there formal language for "higher-ups" or is the language used similarly for all people?

3. Self Orientation: Where does our identity come from? Our own unique self or the group(s) to which we belong? Is our worth in our own individual uniqueness or the level of harmony in which we are with others? Do we have certain social responsibilities and obligations to others and how does that work? How do we view elders and youth?

I am going to break up the class into fours and try and post each group with two international students and two Korean students. 3 groups will read about Activity Orientations and answer the questions in Table 4.3 on page 91. They will write the question on the poster-board and then answer and design it with answers from their nationalities. 3 Groups will read about social relations and answer the questions in Table 4.4 and make a poster. And the final two groups will read about Self-Orientation and answer the questions in table 4.5 on a poster. Then each group will present their answers to the class.

The journal assignment will be to answer the following questions:

What is culture? 100 words

What is my home culture like? 100 words

The Culture Iceberg

The iceberg metaphor is used quite often to describe those things in culture which we are tangible and obvious to the observer, and those things which are beneath the surface, hidden from view, and often not seen by any initial observations. The first time this was introduced it was by a man named Edward Sapir, a German-born American linguist and anthropologist Edward Sapir who said there is overt culture and covert (공공연한 와 덮여있는) culture. Kluckholn, another American anthropologist, later coined the terms explicit and implicit (명백한 와 함축적인). Edward Hall later said that these were not enough, but that there are three categories: informal, formal, and technical. We will get into that, but for the time being we will focus on the iceberg template.

1. The first thing I want to do is get students to brainstorm around the word culture. Hopefully they will brainstorm many things that are visible and obvious, like food and music, but also get into things that are less visible like attitudes about elders and gender roles. I want to begin to give the idea to students the great, great depth of word culture and how deep, deep, deeper still it goes. The iceberg accomplishes this well, because we usually see the top part of a culture, and we can make judgements about what we like or don't based on that small piece. But what we don't see is a vast well of forces and influences, and only when we begin to examine this much larger part can we begin to understand a culture.

2. After we have done our initial brainstorming, I want to begin to think and brainstorm in small groups what these hidden things are, and write their ideas on their iceberg templates provided. After they have had time to do that, we will come together as a class and discuss the top visible parts, and the bottom invisible parts.

3. The third part will be to look at each person's home culture and begin to "unpack" aspects of culture, both which are visible and invisible. The small homogeneous groups will draw a poster of their icebergs and share with the class.

Journal: Write about the cultural iceberg of your home country. How does culture effect you in your life?