This document summarizes Professor Anthony Liddicoat's presentation on assessing intercultural capability in language education. It discusses two constructs of the intercultural - factual cultural knowledge removed from people, and contextualized intercultural engagement between individuals. Three approaches to assessment are outlined: testing communicative behaviors through role-plays and simulations; eliciting understandings of culture through tests; and eliciting understandings of oneself as a participant in intercultural experiences through reflection. The summary concludes by recommending applying the first construct's first and third approaches, and the second construct's third approach when assessing intercultural capability in Indonesian English learning classes.

1. 10/2/2017
Kind of re-presentation of Professor
Liddicoat’s talk at Asia TEFL Yogya 2017
1
Assessing Intercultural
Capability in English Learning
By:
Ferry Antoni

2. 10/2/2017
Kind of re-presentation of Professor
Liddicoat’s talk at Asia TEFL Yogya 2017
2
Original Presentation
“Assessing Intercultural Capability in
Languages Education”
Professor Anthony J. Liddicoat
Affiliations:
University of Warwick
University of South Australia

3. 10/2/2017
Kind of re-presentation of Professor
Liddicoat’s talk at Asia TEFL Yogya 2017
3
Terms used interchangeably
All taken to mean the same thing:
- Intercultural competence
- Intercultural capability
- Interculturality
- The intercultural

4. 10/2/2017
Kind of re-presentation of Professor
Liddicoat’s talk at Asia TEFL Yogya 2017
4
Definition and Operationalization (DaO)
Intercultural capability in communication is the
ability to understand, tolerate, and accept how
and why a person or your interlocutor/partner thinks (1),
speaks (2), behaves (3), and/or acts (4) the way he does with
reference to his own culture  simply an observer towards
an observee in a given culture (5); really one person of a culture
towards another person of another culture in contact (6)
Habermas (1983) terms it ‘communicative action’,
that is, communication with the aim of developing
mutual understanding  this referring to the above latter more

5. 10/2/2017
Kind of re-presentation of Professor
Liddicoat’s talk at Asia TEFL Yogya 2017
5
DaO Cont.
Liddicoat and Scarino in L. Sercu and
A. Paran (2010):
“The interpersonal and interactional nature of the
intercutural requires that the language user is able
to decentre from his/her cultural and linguistic
framework in order to see the world from
alternative perspectives”—Kim (2001) terms this
”third culture perspective”

6. 10/2/2017
Kind of re-presentation of Professor
Liddicoat’s talk at Asia TEFL Yogya 2017
6
DaO Cont.
Intercultural incapability  stereotyping
(7), prejudice (8), etc. which may all
potentially lead to racism

7. 10/2/2017
Kind of re-presentation of Professor
Liddicoat’s talk at Asia TEFL Yogya 2017
7
The Construct of the Intercultural
1. Factual, objective knowledge removed from
people as constructors and users of that
knowledge  cultural knowledge (an observer
towards an observee) (9)
2. Contextual and personalized  intercultural
engagement (one person of a culture towards
another person of another culture in contact)
(10)

8. Approaches to Assessing Interculturality
1. Assessment of intercultural communicative behaviors:
Common formats include role-plays and simulations, which
are used to test norms of interaction (Crozet, 1996; Liddicoat &
Crozet, 2001), pragmatic norms (Hudson, Detmer, & Brown,
1992; Kasper & Dahl, 1991), and some linguistic and
paralinguistic phenomena (Liddicoat & Crozet, 2001); cross-
cultural mediation tasks (Kordes, 1991; Meyer, 1991); and
discourse completion tasks, which assess control of
pragmatic norms and the accuracy of learners’ understanding of
native speakers’ language use and the accuracy of their
pragmatic choices (Kasper & Dahl, 1991)  Constructs 1 and 2
(11)
10/2/2017
Kind of re-presentation of Professor
Liddicoat’s talk at Asia TEFL Yogya 2017
8

9. Approaches cont.
2.Elicitation of the learners’ intercultural
dispositions or understandings. Paige, Jorstad,
Siaya, Klein, & Colby (1999) examine three
different types of such models as potential
approaches for the assessment of intercultural
skills: 1. attitudinal tests; 2. culture assimilator
tests; and 3. cultural awareness tests 
Construct 1 (this sidelined)
10/2/2017
Kind of re-presentation of Professor
Liddicoat’s talk at Asia TEFL Yogya 2017
9

10. Approaches cont.
3.Elicitation: involves not just seeking to draw out
learners’ understanding of intercultural experiences
as observers of others’ participation in
interaction, but most importantly, drawing out
learners’ understandings of themselves as
participants in learning and using language(s)
in the context of culture(s), that is, in learning
and using languages as actual intercultural
experiences  Approach 1 put in construct 2 
then learner reflection and learner response (12)
10/2/2017
Kind of re-presentation of Professor
Liddicoat’s talk at Asia TEFL Yogya 2017
10

11. Question(s) I Asked
Is it possible that in reality intercultural communication
and intercultural (in)capability produce not only
(mis)understanding but also fun and laughter as
depicted in the British comedy series
'Mind Your Language'? 
10/2/2017
Kind of re-presentation of Professor
Liddicoat’s talk at Asia TEFL Yogya 2017
11

12. Recommendation
Application in LB LIA classes:
1. Construct 1, approaches 1 and 3
2. Construct 2, approach 3
10/2/2017
Kind of re-presentation of Professor
Liddicoat’s talk at Asia TEFL Yogya 2017
12

13. Conclusion
English learning and contact in the Indonesian
context specially LB LIA classes comprises
homogeneously Indonesian students. As such,
though students’ intercultural capability can still be
assessed through both constructs—
construct 1, approaches 1 and 3 (fellow Indonesian)
and construct 2, approach 3 (fellow Indonesian);
S-S interaction can be devised for students’ doing
the given activities for the assessment purpose
10/2/2017
Kind of re-presentation of Professor
Liddicoat’s talk at Asia TEFL Yogya 2017
13