Introduction

As we constantly look for ways to live and get along as individuals sharing this planet, “the need to transcend boundaries, to bridge and transform our differences, and to join in the oneness of our humanity while accepting our differences” will show up (Deardorff, 2009, p. 269). This need will continue to drive us as we seek to overcome misunderstandings and conflicts arising from differences that may divide us (Deardorff, 2009). Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) in 2001 stressed the need to incorporate cultural education in language classes, announcing that one of the aims of language learning and teaching should be ensuring all sections of the population “achieve a wider and deeper understanding of the way of life and forms of thought of other people and of their cultural heritage” (CEFR, 2001, p. 3). A popular approach to teaching culture is called the intercultural approach, which emphasizes the understanding of cross-cultural differences and shifts of worldviews (Bennett, 2009); thereby, gaining intercultural communicative competence (ICC). Perceived as a precondition for ICC development, intercultural sensitivity (ICS) refers to “the way people construe cultural difference and … the varying kinds of experience that accompany these constructions” (Bennett, 1993b, p. 24).

In the field of foreign language and L2 education, as Thorne (2007) indicated, there has been a shift made by computer-mediated communication (CMC) that moved “learners away from simulated classroom-based contexts and toward actual interaction with expert speakers of the language they are studying” (p. 424). As such, synchronous CMC has become widespread and enhanced foreign language learning opportunities. So far, research findings indicate that online exchanges pursue increasing cultural awareness of an individual’s home culture and the culture of their interlocutors (Chen & Yang, 2016; Luo & Gao, 2022; Thorne, 2010; Yeh & Mitric, 2021). Previous studies investigated ICS development in online exchanges among peers whose exposure to other cultures was through informant videos or authentic materials (Garrett-Rucks, 2013a, 2013b). There has been little research on the sensitivity development of EFL learners engaged in synchronous online communication with foreign interlocutors in multicultural online communities. What makes this study significant is engaging EFL learners in synchronous communication with foreign interlocutors from different countries. In fact, the particular intercultural training program of this study makes it distinct from other existing studies. Moreover, as there is a dearth of research on intercultural trainings in the Iranian EFL context and learners’ attitudes toward these types of programs are far less probed. To further our understanding of these issues, the present study was conducted to investigate the developmental patterns of ICS in a group of Iranian EFL learners who interacted with culturally distinct counterparts, and explore their perspectives regarding the online CoP created in this study. In the following sections, the theoretical framework and main concepts related to the current study are presented.

Review of Literature

Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity

As the founder of the Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity (DMIS), Bennett (1986a) believed that both similarities and differences among cultures contribute to the development of intercultural communication; however, experiencing cultural difference is fundamental to developing interculturality. DMIS is a comprehensive model which clarifies the process of ICS and intercultural competence through various stages. Using a grounded theory approach, Bennett developed DMIS in the year 1986; however, the developmental pattern in this model was induced from Bennett’s examination of people’s behavior in encountering cultural differences over 20 years and his observation of nuances in people’s worldview changes in their intercultural experiences (Bennett, 2004). ICS is considered as the core of transcending ethnocentrism to ethnorelativism in the developmental process. Bennett (2004) maintained that “as people became more interculturally competent it seemed that there was a major change in the quality of their experience” (p. 62), which he considered as an individual’s movement from ethnocentrism to ethnorelativism. Ethnocentrism indicates assuming the worldview of our own culture central to the reality as a whole (Bennett, 1993b). Alternatively, ethnorelativism is premised on the assumption that “cultures can only be understood relative to one another, and that particular behavior can only be understood within a cultural context” (Bennett, 1993b, p. 46). People in ethnorelative stages are able to suspend their ethnocentric judgments and stereotypes regarding intercultural situations, and they can act appropriately in particular cultural contexts (Bennett, 1993b). Garrett-Rucks (2012) elaborates on DMIS stating that “the DMIS provides an assessment structure for explaining how the person assessed sees, thinks about, and interprets cultural events happening around them and how an individual’s perspective of cultural patterns both guide and limit his or her experience of cultural differences”.

The most ethnocentric stage in DMIS is named Denial of cultural difference, followed by the Defense stage. Bennett enumerates three progressive forms for the Defense stage including denigration, superiority, and reversal. In the middle of the DMIS continuum is the Minimization of cultural difference which is a transition state from ethnocentric viewpoints to ethnorelative perspectives. Physical universalism and transcendent universalism are two forms of Minimization. Acceptance is at the heart of ethnorelativism. There are two forms of development at the Acceptance stage, including respect for behavioral difference and respect for value difference. Adaptation is the next stage in the model, including two sub-stages of empathy, wherein shifts of frames are temporary and intentional, and pluralism, wherein the shifts are permanent and more intentional. The most ethnorelative state is named Integration of cultural difference into one’s identity with two forms of contextual evaluation and constructive marginality. Table 1 below presents a description of the main stages of DMIS.

Table 1 Overview of stages of Bennett’s DMIS
Full size table

Online Community of Practice

Sociocultural theory with its taking account of the material and symbolic mediators of human activities, has been a fundamentally helpful theoretical framework for L2 and CMC researchers (See e.g., Belz, 2002; Thorne, 2004). Technology and CMC in its primary usage were applied in electronic writing and later in networked writing, which led to a new era of community building via communication (Thorne, 2008). A core function of written online discussion is believed by Skinner and Deronnian (2007) to be community building with the purpose of constructing knowledge. The concept of community of practice (CoP) was developed by Wenger (1998), who believed that “learning is the social production of meaning” (p. 49). In other words, learning is a process in which individuals explore concepts with other people.

A CoP is a dialogic and dynamic place for mutual and collaborative learning; as such, it can be conceived of as part of a social perspective toward learning in which, as Clarke (2009) noted, “identity, practice, community, learning and meaning are all interconnected” (p. 35). Based on Brooks and Oliver (2003), teachers are responsible for developing learners’ sense of community and engaging learners in activities that promote the development of a community. In academic settings, students can take part in online communication and build their CoP through collaborative learning and mutual engagement; thus, benefit from their learning environment. In Dooly’s (2011) study on a telecollaborative exchange between teachers in Spain and the U.S., it was found that the participants could build a CoP and engage in a shared repertoire, displaying more experienced practitioner knowledge.

Addressing the aims of the present study, the notion of CoP finds its way in this research as the participation of EFL learners in an online group and their exchange of ideas with other intercultural speakers in WhatsApp, created an online CoP in which the learners collaborated in conducting effective intercultural communication and negotiation of meaning with peers from diverse cultures. The intercultural speakers and Iranian EFL learners were the core members of the community and the teacher was the convenor. As indicated by Wenger (1998) members in CoPs mutually participate in appropriate activities. In our study, we tried to make a community not a team with pre-assigned roles, as such sometimes there was a shift of role in the intercultural group and they took the convenor role in the online CoP.

The intercultural interaction in the online CoP and exchanging ideas with peers and the teacher made it possible for learners to communicate more meaningfully and become aware of the existing cultural similarities and differences in their home culture and the culture of their interlocutors.

CMC and Intercultural Communication

In a systematic review of the role of intercultural exchanges in ICC development, Avgousti (2018) argued that online exchanges could be implemented and practiced by EFL teachers and researchers in order to “combat stereotypical attitudes and misconceptions of a national identity” (p. 23). Using synchronous CMC, which is mainly referred to as ‘chat,’ has been studied in variegated second language research studies. One of the striking features of synchronous CMC for second or foreign language educators has been its similarity to the language produced in communication (Thorne, 2008).

Moreover, studies on CMC and intercultural development have revealed that mere contact with people from diverse cultural backgrounds does not directly influence learners’ intercultural learning (Kitade, 2012). It is also suggested by Stockwell (2018) that ICC development is not solely gaining cultural awareness; it is also related to knowing and understanding attitudes, beliefs, and values together with attaining interpersonal skills.

So far, studies on the role of CMC in developing EFL learners’ ICC were concerned with telecollaborative projects (see for instance, Alcaraz-Mármol, 2020; Belz, 2002; Etri, 2021; Furstenberg et al., 2001; Hirotani & Fujii, 2019; Thorne, 2003; Toscu et al., 2020; Wu, et al., 2022; Zhu et al., 2005). These studies indicated a beneficial effect for telecollaborative projects in developing EFL learners’ ICC. However, most of the previous studies on synchronous CMC have focused on linguistic or discoursal elements of language and have underestimated the cultural dimension of language (Kern, 2006). An exception is the studies of Garrett-Rucks with a focus on CMC and ICS development. In an extensive study, Garrett-Rucks (2013a) explored a group of French language learners’ intercultural understanding through CMC wherein learners discussed cultural matters in English. Different instruction materials were used in this study, and discourse analysis of discussion transcripts revealed development in learners’ ICS. The findings provided evidence on the collective shift of the learners’ perspectives from ethnocentric views to ethnorelative thinking. Garret-Rucks (2013a) study was, in fact, an attempt to apply Bennett’s DMIS in assessing ICS of foreign language learners; however, the main aim of the study was to investigate the role of teaching materials on developing learners’ ICS. As a further proof for the usefulness of CMC in intercultural development, in a case study Garrett-Rucks (2013b) examined the developmental process of three French language learners in online discussion with peers. The outcomes indicated that learners’ cross-cultural understanding was maximized, while their pre-existing stereotypes of French culture were minimized as a consequence of taking part in online discussions with their peers.

Intercultural training aims at developing tolerance for cultural differences, and at the same time it aims at promoting cultural diversity (Iqbal, 2021).The effective role of intercultural training in developing ICS has been acknowledged in previous studies (Liu, 2020; Taşkin, 2020; Tatlonghari, 2022). In addition, the feasibility and comprehensibility of intercultural training can be inferred from Lewis’ (2005) argument in which teachers were believe to play a significant role in the teaching of culture. In an intercultural training program, Demirkol (2019) investigated the ICS level of Turkish EFL learners who received intercultural instructions by Turkish and international EFL teachers. The findings revealed no significant difference between the ICS of learners who received intercultural instruction by international teachers and those whose teachers were Turkish. However, being taught by international teachers led to a slightly higher ICS level in some aspects of ICS among the learners.

Against this background, it is revealed that the developmental patterns of EFL learners’ ICS, especially when interacting with learners of differing cultural backgrounds, and the developmental stages which learners pass through have been far less probed. Furthermore, due to the scarcity of research on intercultural sensitivity trainings among Iranian EFL learners in online communities of practice, learners; perception of and attitudes toward such training programs have not been adequately explored. Accordingly, the present study was conducted to fill these gaps by providing answers to the following research questions.

RQ1: What is the developmental patterns of Iranian EFL learners’ ICS, when interacting with learners of differing cultural backgrounds based on Bennett’s model?

RQ2: What are Iranian EFL learners’ perceptions of online CoP?

Methodology

Participants

The participants of this study were 15 Iranian EFL learners and 4 intercultural speakers from four countries. The Iranian learners studied English Language and Literature at the University of Guilan, located in the north of Iran. They were proficient in English and had the experience of contacting people of other countries in English. The foreign participants were Australian, Bengali, Serbian, and Swedish speakers who volunteered to participate in online discussions on intercultural matters with Iranian counterparts. The age of all the participants was between 19 and 22 years old, and they were competent English language learners who enjoyed communicating with people from other countries. Table 2 shows the characteristics of the participants in terms of gender, age, and English learning experience.

Table 2 The participants’ characteristics
Full size table

Small group discussion is a constructive instructional technique which can assist learners with learning how to negotiate cultural difference (Mahoney & Schamber, 2004); likewise, in the present study learners could exchange ideas on cultural differences and similarities by reflecting upon their own native culture and comparing or contrasting it with the culture of their foreign interactants. Moreover, on the basis of what McBride and Wildner-Basset (2008) indicated, online discussions provided the learners with an opportunity to examine intercultural worldviews as well as divergent views on the same discussion topic. It also helped them in considering a shift of cultural perspectives, by contributing to the discussions in a friendly environment in which they were free to express their ideas. All the learners’ discussions were digitally recorded in Microsoft Word and used for further analysis.

Participant selection was purposive and based on convenient sampling. Through personal contact with the foreign interlocutors, it was found that they possessed most of the characteristics of intercultural speakers depicted by Byram (1997). For instance, these learners actively took part in cross-cultural online chats and interacted with people from diverse cultures. They also declared their curiosity toward other cultures and showed their eagerness in relating to and contacting people from various cultural backgrounds in their introductory profiles in the website. The intercultural speakers themselves agreed to take part in the study after receiving invitations through a global chatting website (www.penpalworld.com). In accordance with the aims of the study, it was tried to find interested, cooperative, and responsible online peers who were at similar age and proficiency level as the EFL groups.

Online Platform

WhatsApp, a widespread social medium, was the primary platform for data collection in this study. WhatsApp, as a synchronous tool, was chosen as the discussion platform in this study due to its ease of access, speed, and applicability to the purposes of the online sessions. The learners were required to exchange ideas at a pre-specified time. The discussion topics in the online classes were derived was the textbook Mirrors and Windows (Huber-Kriegler et al., 2003). As indicated by the book’s authors, Mirrors and Windows was mainly written to increase intercultural understanding in the world. The cultural topics in this book were used to stimulate online discussions; however, the book’s content was not the focus of the discussion. In other words, group discussions among the participants, including the online EFL group and the intercultural speakers, revolved around cultural issues and the values and norms of the society. Moreover, it was tried to let the discussion flow naturally; however, to lead the talks towards the goals of the research, the initial topics about the notion of culture and language learning were introduced to the learners. Samples of group discussions are available in Appendix 1.

Procedure

In the first stage, the participants of the study were homogenized through Oxford Placement Test at upper-intermediate and advanced proficiency levels. They were also debriefed about the aims of online discussions with their teacher and foreign interlocutors. In the debriefing session, the participants were informed about the aim of holding the discussion session which was involving EFL learners in intercultural communication and gaining insight into their possible development in ICS. Then, the learners were asked to take part in online discussions once a week, and the whole program lasted for about 3 months. The total discussion sessions were 8 and in each session one cultural topic from the textbook Mirrors and Windows was discussed. After the casual greetings, the online discussions started with the teacher’s (convenor’s) posting of the discussion prompt and asking the learners to share their perspectives with other peers. All the participants were required to take an active part in the discussions, and when a learner was not interested in a topic other peers collaborated to make the discussion enjoyable. It should be noted that this study was specifically designed for the purposes of the research, and was not part of the university’s regular curriculum.

By the end of the online discussions, semi-structured interviews were conducted with Iranian EFL learners to gain a nuanced understanding of their attitudes toward the online CoP and interactions with intercultural speakers. The follow-up interview consisted of two main questions: (1) Did you find online interaction with your friends and instructor useful for gaining cultural knowledge? If so, how? (2) Was the online discussion helpful in developing your intercultural sensitivity? If so, how? All of the interviews were audio-recorded and later transcribed for further analysis.

Data Analysis

To gain a nuanced understanding of developmental changes in the EFL learners’ ICS, thematic content analysis of learners’ online discussions was run. There were approximately 100 pages of transcribed discussions. The analysis was done on the basis of Bennett’s (1986a) model with a major focus on the analysis of the learners’ verbal behavior. Using discourse analysis with a focus on semantics to derive coding categories, provided the researcher with a framework for the deductive analysis of culturally sensitive aspects of learners’ discussions (Patton, 2002). Further, discourse analysis made it possible to systematically gather, analyze, and interpret evidence to examine ICS level of the learners. Since the online discussions were held using the WhatsApp social media, learners could show their feelings through various emojis, and they used casual language which made the communication flow easier to them. These features were extremely helpful in the intercultural discourse analysis of the learners’ interactions and situating learners’ statements in DMIS stages, as they provided a way into the inner thoughts of learners and the affective part of the discussions. Theory-based sampling (Patton, 2002) was used for selecting units of text to find stages of DMIS. Theory-based sampling helped us to select text units representing “important theoretical constructs” (Patton, 2002, p. 238) corresponding Bennett’s DMIS. To increase the accuracy of the analysis and reduce researcher’s subjectivity in assessment of discussions, another rater was asked to evaluate the learners’ statements. Although the raters agreed on the majority of stages, there were some cases of disagreement which were resolved after reviewing the DMIS stages together. Using Pearson’s r the inter-rater reliability coefficient for assigning learner’s statements in online discussions to appropriate sensitivity stages was found to be 0.87 which is an acceptable reliability index (Sprinthall, 1990, p. 208).

Finally, after transcribing all the interviews learners’ responses were analyzed through content analysis and were divided into two themes showing learners’ perceptions regarding, (1) Usefulness of online CoP in gaining intercultural knowledge, (2) Helpfulness of online CoP in advancing learners’ ICS.

Results

The primary aim of the present was identifying Iranian EFL learners’ developmental patterns of ICS. To this end, the participants’ discussions went through a discourse analysis on the basis of DMIS. The following table illustrates the total number of ethnocentric and ethnorelative statements found in the discussions. It should be noted that, in the analysis of learners’ talks only the ethnocentric and ethnorelative statements made by Iranian learners were coded, and the statements made by intercultural speakers were not included in the analysis. Furthermore, in the following section presenting sample statements for each DMIS stage, the statements expressed by intercultural speakers are merely written to provide explicit examples to the readers.

As depicted in Table 3, 137 instances of ethnocentric and ethnorelative thinking were identified in learners’ discussion. It is evident that ethnocentric worldviews (n = 97) outnumbered ethnorelative thinking (n = 40) in the online discussions held between Iranian EFL learners and intercultural speakers. The table also indicates that Iranian learners mainly made defensive statements (n = 60) with regard to cultural differences, followed by statements in which cultural differences were minimized (n = 37). Acceptance of cultural differences was also common in the learners’ discussions (n = 34); while Adaptation was the least frequent (n = 6) ICS stage. Finally, the table indicates that there were not any statements indicating Denial and Integration stages of DMIS in the learners’ talks.

Table 3 Ethnocentric and ethnorelative stages coded in online discussions
Full size table

Table 4 presents a detailed account of the frequency of identified ethnocentric and ethnorelative statements in each week of online discussions.

Table 4 Frequency of DMIS stages in online discussions
Full size table

Table 4 illustrated that the most frequent identified DMIS stages were Defense stage (f = 12) in the third week of the study, and Minimization stage (f = 12) in week seven. Apart from Denial and Integration which were not identified in learners’ discussions, the least frequent identified DMIS stages were Acceptance stage (f = 1) in week three, and Adaptation (f = 1) in the seventh week of online discussions.

In what follows, results of the discourse analysis of the online group’s discussions are presented through sample statements for each DMIS stage. As indicated earlier, among stages, no evidence for the two stages of Denial and Integration was found. In other words, learners did not display any worldviews of denying cultural differences or integrating differences into their identities. It needs to be pointed out that since defensive worldviews were the most common ones in learners’ discussions, the sub-stages of this phase are elaborated and exemplified in this section. The statements made by Iranian EFL learners are coded as (IR), while the statements made by intercultural speakers are coded as (INTC).

Ethnocentric Stages

Defense

“Denigration” of cultural differences, as a sub-stage of the Defense, was prevalent when the learners compared and contrasted food and eating habits in their home culture with that of their foreign interlocutors. The sub-stage of “Denigration” was not quite common in learners’ discussions and in rare cases learners degraded other cultures. The following excerpt instantiates “Denigration” when learners talked about eating habits in diverse cultures.

IR: Agree. Eating habits can say a lot about cultures and personalities. For example, in China in most of the foods that they eat the animal which is used for making that food is ALIVE. I think that shows more than just “eating habits” about that nation.

In the above example, the learner judged the whole Chinese nation and culture by their food and used negative stereotyping (Bennett, 1986a, 2004).

Another denigrative statement is made in the following example in which the learner talked about the way food shapes a person mentally and physically by mentioning Indians’ habit of eating spicy food.

IR: And they [Indians] are sharp-razor characters….. They are a little aggressive and also emotional because of the kind of food they eat.

A further instance of denigrative thought was found when one of the learners criticized Hungarian culture on not bringing their children to public places like restaurants by stating:

IR: This is terrible. This completely deprives the child of learning basic social skills by having interaction with others. I remember well that my dad took me to markets and we bought fruits, food and other things together. I was only 8 years old, yet he still asked for my opinion that what necessary things we should buy!

Instances of “Superiority” sub-stage of Defense phase were mainly found when the students talked about food and eating habits.

IR: Let me mention our city’s various food.

IR: The only Food Creative City. [Rasht]

In this excerpt learners’ talks revolved around food as the next priority in people’s lives after having a shelter. Forough and Rouzhin praised their city’s food. The above statements show Iranian learners’ cultural pride, especially in terms of their local culture which is a sign of “Superiority” as explicated by Bennett (1986a, 2004, 2017).

A further instance of “Superiority” can be found in the following excerpt when the learner tried to introduce her native bread to the foreign interlocutors.

IR: Let’s name our famous bread “Barbari” and “Sangak.”

Or when Negin proudly talked about Iranian food which is known for its great taste.

IR: …yeah and as you said Iranian food takes a long time to be made and some of the even elementary materials that are used in some of our food cannot be easily found sometimes. But in the end… Iran is really famous for its delicious food among those who have seen here.

Like the previous sub-stages of Defense, attitude of “Reversal” was also mainly observed when discussing food and eating habits. There were many instances of “Reversal” sub-stage of Defense phase in students’ discussions. An illustration of “Reversal” can be found in the following excerpt when the learner stated her idea about gendered roles in Iran:

IR: Unfortunately, in our society, [they] put more attention on men. But I think men and women are the same and should be equal in all things. And the most important thing is salary. I can’t understand why women have less salary than men. And all things about works and jobs...

In another example, the learner agreed to her peer who earlier stated that women should take part in social activities and do household chores and posited:

IR: Agree. The fact is the world is changing, and so is our country and the whole situation whether these people want it or not. So, I think people will find a way to deal with things anyway. The main problem is that these changes could have been applied long ago if the management was done right. The entire system, the society is being ruled by people who simply don’t want these changes to happen :)))))

In the above excerpt, the learner criticized the management system in Iran by comparing it with other places in the world and considering the weakness of Iran’s policymakers and government. This outright criticism of native culture is a sign of “Reversal” stage in DMIS (Bennett, 1986a, 2004).

Other obvious examples of “Reversal” were spotted in a dialogue between two learners talking about formal education covering the topic “Up in the morning and off to school.” For instance, in the following excerpt Iranian learners explicitly demonstrated their hatred towards the educational system in Iran by stating:

IR: I think Iran is degree centered. Everyone wants to get a degree and they forget the main thing.

IR: Yeah, totally agree. I hate educational system in Iran…I really hate the system.

In these examples, the learners visibly downgraded their native country’s educational system and criticized it as being degree-centered and not focusing on learning subject matters.

“Reversal” was also noticed in the statements made by one of the intercultural speakers from Bangladesh, who criticized Bengali educational system by stating that other systems such as British or American are far better than his own country’s educational system.

INTC: In Bangladesh we have so many foreign education boards such as American which is known as IB, they teach us American culture and history. There is British board which is known as Cambridge, and they have another board named Edexcel. Each of the board has different educational systems which is far better than my own country’s one which is n as NCTB.

Minimization

Collectively, there were plenty instances of Minimization stage in the learners’ discussions. In what follows some of them are presented. When talking about food and eating habits, one of the learners stated:

INTC: Food brings people together, even if they are from diverse cultures.

In another case, when talking about rules for starting eating, a learner generalized the rules to all cultures and religions; followed by one of the foreign interlocutor’s disapproval. This generalization specifies Minimization stage in DMIS. In fact, the learner tended to describe all cultures as essentially the same (Bennett, 1986a, 2004).

IR: I think in any religion they say prayers before or after eating a meal, especially dinner.

INTC: I am an Orthodox Christian and I’ve never seen a family saying their prayers before or after eating a meal. At least in Serbia.

Further instances of Minimization were noticed in the session discussing gendered roles, or the distinction between men and women in society. For instance, one of the learners stated:

IR: The roots seem really old...I mean aside from religious thoughts and ideologies this unfair distinction has always existed in most cultures and societies.

In response to the prompt asking for the reasons of child abuse or child smacking, one of the learners generalized her idea to all the other cultures by stating:

IR: People usually want their kids to be calm and they appreciate seeing the behavior of an adult in a 5-years-old kid which is actually totally wrong. But I’m not saying people must be ok with every type of hyperactivity that some kids show, but a specific amount of being lark and playful is essential for kids.

Ethnorelative Stages

Acceptance

Ethnorelative worldview statements found in the discussions were mainly characterized by the learners’ tendency to accept or even appreciate cultural differences. The following excerpts illustrate statements in which Acceptance of cultural differences were identified.

In response to the prompt seeking learners’ ideas on the relation between learning a language and the culture of people speaking that language, and whether the language is affected by the culture, one of the learners indicated that:

IR: Kind of think that learning a new language is absolutely related to their culture, for example when I started learning Turkish, I found some specific customs and beliefs that was just for them, but because they are Asian their culture is nearly the same as ours, after all, what I want to say is that Yes, Yes, Yes, It is affected.

In a further instance, one of the learners considered himself as being familiar with the culture of English-speaking people by stating that:

IR: I like to consider myself familiar. Because I got plenty of cultural knowledge via studying, meeting foreign people and watching movies that demonstrate cultural norms. One as an English learner will soon find himself/herself in need of knowing about the influence of culture on language and visa-versa. Failure to understand the importance of this matter at important levels of education will eventually lead to misunderstanding and social tensions.

In the above examples, the learners acknowledged their ability to understand cultural differences, and seemed to be aware of cultural differences (Bennett, 2004, 2011). Likewise, when discussing food and eating habits, instances of the Acceptance stage were noticed in students’ statements. For example, in discussing the use of bread in daily meals, one of the intercultural speakers stated:

INTC: There are different types of bread, mostly the European uses loaf, in India and Bangladesh our usual breakfast begins with a type of bread which is known as “roti” Or “paratha.”

In the above excerpt, the learner seemed aware of cultural differences in the use of bread when he shared his ideas about eating habits. In another case, one of the Iranian EFL learners expressed interest and eagerness to a statement made by one of the ELF speakers from Serbia, when she was talking about preparing food in her country:

INTC: The Serbians tend to make a lot of effort in preparing food and enjoying it. Whenever one goes to another’s home, they are almost certain that there will be food served.

IR: Wow, I want to live there.:)

As Bennett (2004) stated, respecting cultural difference and showing interest in them is a sign of being in the Acceptance stage of sensitivity. In the above statement, the Iranian EFL learner personally related to the ELF speaker’s perspective, thus was assessed to be in the Acceptance stage of DMIS.

In the session discussing intercultural issues surrounding “Conversation and … silence” also some statements showing that the learners are in the Acceptance stage were found. For instance, when talking about the existing rules in conversation one of the learners pointed out:

IR: Then...to be honest I don’t know if that has any rules ...I mean you just got try not being rude. And the description of the word polite might differ a little in different cultures but generally you should just try not to interrupt people and keep the topic interesting.

What Negin stated signified that she is aware of cultural differences in conversation and its rules; thus, was considered to show traces of Acceptance stage (Bennett, 2011).

Adaptation

Ethnorelative statements displaying Adaptation stage were very rare in students’ discussions. When talking about food and conversation and silence a few examples of Adaptation were noticed. The following excerpt represents the worldview of one of the learners regarding Heram and Makrouh food in Iranian culture and religion. He stated:

IR: Luckily, I have no such restrictions.

I’ve tried bacon and also sparrow.

And they are good.

This learner seemed to be able to adapt to the perspectives of people from other cultures by mentioning his freedom in eating some types of food which are not commonly used in his own native country. Besides, when discussing conversational rules and talking with strangers about international relations, an Iranian learner posited:

IR: Well… international relations are more restricted. You can’t just change the subject in the middle of a conversation between a foreigner and yourself. You should also avoid using critical diversions. Because it may seem annoying to the person you’re talking to.

In the above excerpt, the learner seemed to be aware of the use of correct verbal and non-verbal behaviors (communication skills) in communicating with foreigners; thus, the statement was assessed to be in the Adaptation stage as indicated by Olson and Kroeger (2001).

Interview Results

Semi-structured interviews were run with the Iranian participants to seek their perceptions of and attitudes toward the online CoP and intercultural communication in which they took part. Two themes emerged out of the content analysis of interviews:

Usefulness of Online CoP in Gaining Inter/Cultural Knowledge

The majority of Iranian learners held a positive view towards the online CoP of the present study. Enjoyment created in the online discussions led to the learners’ appreciation of cultural similarities and differences, as one of the interviewees stated, “…I really enjoyed getting to know other cultures and seeing how different or similar some cultural manners can be…”. Similarly, when asked about their ideas about the usefulness of online interactions for gaining cultural knowledge, another interviewee mentioned: “The online discussions were absolutely useful, knowledge gained from interacting with people of countries like Bangladesh was very eye-opening, since I hadn’t had interaction with such cultures.”

The learners further emphasized the value of joining the online CoP in increasing knowledge of their own culture, as it provided an opportunity to examine and explore their home culture: “well… the online interaction was useful, since I figured out that I don’t know even my own culture completely. It was an encouragement for me to have a better exploration and study of my culture, like that session we talked about food or the treatment with children, so … I think it was useful.”

A further point emphasized by many of the interviewees was the friendly environment created in the online CoP of the present study, which led to a pleasant experience and thus better communication with their peers and the intercultural speakers. There were also cases of temporary dissatisfaction of online interactions among the interviewees, however, as the discussions continued the learners became more interested. As one of the interviewees stated: “…At first they seemed unnecessary but as the sessions became more developed, we were encountering different cultural subjects and had the ability to criticize them analytically.”

Helpfulness of Online CoP in Advancing Learners’ ICS

Concerning the ideas of Iranian EFL learners about the helpfulness of online CoP in advancing their ICS, most of the learners found the online interactions helpful in increasing their ICS. A common reply by the learners was their eagerness to visit places like Bangladesh or Sweden: “…I want to visit places like Bangladesh or Sweden, where I never thought I want to visit.” However, one of the male interviewees still held a defensive view stating that the online CoP was not very helpful in the growth of his ICS: “…it was not much helpful, I always dedicate an amount of time to analyze a person, and background of people I have to interact with…”. This view highlights the significance of individual differences or personality traits in ICS development.

On the other hand, the exchange of ideas about different topics made many of the learners aware of similarities and differences between their own culture and that of intercultural speakers, and their various point of views. Thus, the learners conceded that they have become more sensitive to these commonalities and differences throughout the discussions: “…in the online sessions I could understand others’ point of views and opinions about different topics which we talked about such as education, children, and so on. This helped me know more about the existence of differences in various cultures and how people view these issues.”

Discussion

Development in intercultural communication is a complex and gradual process (Byram, 1997; Fantini, 2011). However, implementing pedagogical interventions that can help learners in moving toward ethnorelative thinking when communicating with culturally distinct counterparts can promote deeper cultural understanding. This study explored the developmental pattern of ICS in a group of EFL learners through discourse analysis of the learners’ online discussions with peers and intercultural speakers based on Bennett’s DMIS. DMIS describes what it means to be good at intercultural relations. This does not mean that ethnorelative people are generally better people. All it means is that ethnorelative people can better differentiate cultural difference compared to ethnocentric people (Bennett, 2004). Accordingly, ethnorelative people are better in adapting to cultural differences while engaged in interaction. As such, being interculturally sensitive means being able to adapt to cultural differences and having a better relationship with people of diverse cultures whose worldviews differ from us and adapting to that situation.

The current study proposed an intercultural program to facilitate language teachers’ and EFL learners’ task in gaining intercultural knowledge and also sensitivity to diverse perspectives by engaging learners in online discussion with intercultural speakers. Currently, a variety of mediums and platforms are available to language teachers and learners through CMC and the widespread social media. These mediums can be helpful in creating intercultural communication among learners in order to heighten their intercultural knowledge. As such, learners can be prepared to deal more openly with cross-cultural challenges created in the current multicultural world in which there is no way to escape differences. O’Dowd (2003) argued that assessing learners’ knowledge and skills with reference to intercultural communication in a short period of time is not feasible; however, similar to this study we can observe changes in learners’ ICS development in a short period of involvement in intercultural interactions.

The findings of this study revealed that Reversal was the dominant perspective in the whole discussion weeks. However, towards the end of the online training (in weeks 5–8) a moderate shift of perspective was witnessed in the learners’ thoughts from Reversal to Minimization of cultural difference and Acceptance of difference. These findings are congruent with the results of previous studies which reported positive outcomes in exchange of perspectives with members of other cultures (see e.g., Furstenberg, 2010; Garrett-Rucks, 2013a; Lomicka, 2006). Similarly, the present study found exchange of ideas among Iranian EFL learners and intercultural speakers beneficial in advancing Iranian learners’ ICS and assisting them to move toward ethnorelative thinking. There was no intervention from the facilitator to bring about changes in learners’ ICS level and it was found to occur during the discussion sessions. The “reversal” was found across samples as the frequency of the identified stage indicates.

In the online CoP in this study, the learners negotiated meaning and mutually engaged in the task of responding to questions posed and challenged each other’s ideas. Indeed, multiple cultural perspectives provided by intercultural speakers and the utilized textbook in the online community, afforded Iranian EFL learners an opportunity to become familiar with and relate to alternate viewpoints. The presence of intercultural speakers further encouraged a deeper understanding of both home culture and foreign cultures in the learners. Indeed, when intercultural speakers proposed their cultural views, the danger of perpetuating ethnocentric thinking which Garrett-Rucks (2013a) warned about, was more or less diminished. The reason is that in every discussion session various worldviews were underscored without elevating a specific point of view. As learners in the present study participated in online discussion and learned about other cultures, they made a moderate shift toward ethnorelative thinking, and they were shown to be more open to perceiving cultural differences (Bennett, 2004). Thus, additional time spent in relevant culture learning afforded participants opportunities to enlarge their worldviews and reflect upon other cultures.

Moreover, in the analysis of learners’ talks no sign of Denial and Integration stages of DMIS was observed. The reason for the nonexistence of Denial statements might be due to the technological advancements which have made contact with other people more feasible. In fact, nowadays cases of isolation or separation—as sub-stages of Denial- are very rare, and people can more easily contact with their counterparts (Bennett, 2004). A further reason for lack of traces of denial stage in learners’ talks can be their language learning background, as being a language learner will substantially make the individual familiar with the culture of other people. As, such it was predictable that the learners were able to perceive cultural differences. Additionally, the reason that no evidence of Integration was found in the discussions may be that none of the Iranian participants had the experience of living abroad, since as Bennett (2004) indicated, to reach the last stage of DMIS one should live in the foreign environment for a while. A further reason which can back up the nonexistence of Integration in the online discussions is the length of the program, which was not long enough for the learners to reach this stage. Thus, the participants could not develop a truly multicultural worldview as evidenced in the integration stage (Bennett & Bennett, 2004).

The findings of interviews revealed that the majority of Iranian leaners held a positive view toward the experience of taking part in an online CoP involving EFL learners of differing cultural backgrounds. They found the online interactions useful in reinforcing their ICS and their knowledge of home culture. This finding corroborate the results of previous studies in which EFL learners positively evaluated engagement in intercultural training program (see e.g., Hagley, 2020; Taşkin, 2020; Tiranaz et al., 2018). The positive ideas of the learners regarding the intercultural online community in this study further are congruent with the study of Grasza (2022) who found that implementation of intercultural tasks are positively received by EFL learners and teachers in Poland. Moreover, the interview results once more highlighted the significance of individual differences in gaining intercultural knowledge and developing in ICS, as a number of interviewees indicated the importance of having comprehensive information about their interactants’ background and its determining role in their ICS advancement.

Overall, by the completion of the study learners tended to pose less evaluative judgments, yet there were cases in which they deemed all the cultures to be equal or similar; thus, minimized cultural differences. Indeed, although the learners had evaluative and judgmental views towards cultural differences, some traces of ethnorelative thinking, especially Acceptance of cultural differences, were also documented in their views. Accordingly, the inclusion of foreign interlocutors raised Iranian EFL learners’ awareness of their own culture, however, it did not make a major shift in their worldviews towards cultural differences and a moderate transition from Minimization towards Acceptance was evidenced by the end of the program in the learners’ online discussions with intercultural speakers.

To develop learners’ ICS, instructional interventions should create an environment which fosters a desire for growth in the learners. Vygotsky (1987) believed that instructional interventions which involve language “[set] in motion a variety of developmental processes” (p. 90). To appropriate interventions to learners’ developmental stance, instructors need to consider learner’s ‘zone of proximal development,’ explained by Vygotsky (1987) as “the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem-solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem-solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers” (p. 89). Further, Vygotsky (1992) posited that to enable development in learners, instructional techniques should provide cooperative assistance so that learners reach potential developmental levels; otherwise, instructions will be directed toward learners’ weaknesses rather than their strengths.

The role of L2 instructor or facilitator is central in assisting learners’ development within the stages of ICS and guiding learners toward potential developmental levels as explicated by Vygotsky (1992). For instance, if learners’ actual developmental level in ICS is the Minimization stage, considering learners’ potential developmental level, the instructor can direct learners toward other stages of DMIS such as Acceptance (Mahoney & Schamber, 2004). In the present study, the teacher-researcher tried to stick to the principles of Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory by directing learners toward understanding cross-cultural differences. As indicated before, learners mainly made defensive statements in their discussions. This stance was very obvious from the beginning of the online classes. In accordance with Bennett’s (1986a, 2004) suggestions, the teacher-researcher attempted to lead the discussions toward commonalities among cultures, so that learners’ movement to further stages of DMIS continuum could be facilitated. Nevertheless, too much emphasis on commonalities could have a negative effect, in that learners may not be able to notice cultural differences (Bennett, 1986a, 2004). As such, it was tried to consider cross-cultural differences through getting help from the content of the utilized textbook. In this way, the learners’ actual and potential levels of development were taken into account, and they could move on their ICS level.

The outcomes of this study have a number of implications. The main implication of this study is that teachers in countries like Iran, which is an EFL context with limited contact with other countries, can make extensive use of the potentials of technology and social media to make learners familiar with the intercultural world. As such, the online communities of practice such as the one suggested in this study can provide an option for EFL teachers to integrate culture teaching in language instruction and promote language learners’ ICS. Moreover, the findings are significant in that the online CoP in this study can be considered as an educational tool which can be used to implement intercultural teaching in EFL classrooms. As conception of language and culture and their relationship evolved, foreign language pedagogy has also been subject to change. To fill the gap between pedagogical theories encouraging culture teaching and understanding and actual implementation of theory in language classes (Phillips, 2011; Sercu, 2005), teacher education programs need to address ways to cultivate cultural understanding in future teachers. This could be achieved through helping future teachers to reflect on and assess their own views and understanding of various cultures, for instance through intercultural discussions (Garrett-Rucks, 2013a). A further implication of this study is that implementing online discussion with intercultural speakers and creating online communities of practice can help EFL learners’ progress in their ICS, as they can reflect more deeply on their own culture and also other cultures. Our findings can also contribute to the studies on peer interaction as it was found that the collaboration of learners in helping each other to expand their intercultural awareness and understanding can assist them to move a step forward on their developmental stage. Finally, this study highlights the significance of qualitative analyses of EFL learners’ intercultural discussions to find out about the stage of learners’ ICS in order to help them move toward other stages in the intercultural training programs.

Conclusions

The complexity of the task of advancing intercultural competence has been acknowledged by intercultural theorists such as Bennett (1993a, 1993b), Byram (1997), Fantini (2011) and Kramsch (1993, 2009). Learners need to have a sufficient and proficient command of language to reflect on and mediate cultural differences. A training program which emphasizes analyzing and evaluating cultural differences, reinforces movement toward ethnorelative stages of sensitivity development (Mahoney & Schamber, 2004) by fostering an open climate, emphatic responses, and greater awareness. The findings of this study indicated that the pedagogical intervention in which learners participate in online intercultural discussions and interaction with intercultural speakers is moderately effective in shifting Iranian EFL learners’ worldviews toward cultural differences from more ethnocentric views to ethnorelative perspectives. From this shift of perspective, it can be inferred that the online CoP in which learners cooperate, and exchange ideas is a helpful platform in making learners familiar with their interlocutors’ culture and minimizing their cultural bias. An interesting aspect of online interactions with people of diverse cultures, revealed in the interviews, was that the Iranian learners’ intercultural communication was mainly limited to communicating with English speakers of countries like or Canada, England, and they had rarely contacted people of countries like Bangladesh. As such, they became more interested in less- contacted cultures and showed eagerness to visit those places.

There are some limitations that need to be acknowledged. One limitation of the study is the length of time spent in online interaction which was not enough to fully explore developmental stages. A further limitation is the probable threat to the study’s internal validity in that learners may have uttered socially desirable responses to discussion prompts in order to please the instructor. However, by being noted that their responses will not have any effect on their grades this limitation was dealt with. Moreover, the speed of interaction through WhatsApp, although a merit in itself, was considered as a flaw in the program by a few interviewed learners. Future research can probe the development of learners’ ICS in longer phases of communication. Future studies can also explore the development of intercultural communication in learners engaged in interaction with foreign interlocutors using Byram’s model of ICC and inspect whether the analysis of learners’ statements demonstrate any development in their ICC.