Abstract
As universities increasingly prioritize global citizenship through study abroad programmes, intercultural communicative competence (ICC) has become central to Chinese as a foreign language (CFL) education. Whilst blended study abroad provision is expanding, culturally responsive pedagogies remain underexamined in Irish higher education contexts. This study protocol outlines a single-case, one-group pre–post design investigating within-cohort changes in ICC associated with experiential Chinese cultural workshops in an 11-week blended CFL study abroad course at an Irish private university. The study adopts a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design (QUANT → qual). In Phase 1, the full cohort (estimated n = 20–30) will complete pre- and post-course administrations of the Students' Intercultural Communicative Competence Self-Assessment (SISA). Quantitative analyses will report descriptive statistics, paired-samples t-tests (or Wilcoxon signed-rank tests where assumptions are not met), and effect sizes (Cohen's d or rank-biserial correlation), alongside internal consistency for the target sample. In Phase 2, purposive sampling (approximately 10–12 participants) will support qualitative data collection through semi-structured interviews, reflective blogs, and Zoom classroom recordings, analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Integration will occur by using quantitative patterns to inform qualitative sampling and interview foci, and by merging findings in interpretation. The protocol is theoretically grounded in ICC model and . Experiential Learning Theory, mapping workshop objectives to Byram's five savoirs and structuring learning through experience–reflection cycles. Given the one-group design, the study will avoid causal attribution and is expected to generate transferable insights into how experiential cultural pedagogy can be operationalised and evaluated in blended CFL study abroad settings.
1 Introduction
1.1 Overview
International student mobility has accelerated in recent decades, shaped by more accessible international travel, policy discourses on transnational cooperation and globalization, and the perceived value of overseas experience for educational and socioeconomic advancement (). In Irish higher education, internationalization has continued to expand, and study abroad programmes remain a central mechanism through which institutions seek to cultivate graduates' global outlooks and intercultural capabilities (). Within this context, intercultural communicative competence (ICC) has become an increasingly explicit learning outcome in foreign language education, with direct implications for curriculum design and pedagogy.
Ireland's engagement with China has also intensified over the past four decades, alongside growing student interest in Chinese language learning. Chinese studies provision has expanded across Irish higher education since the establishment of the first-degree programme in 2006, and Chinese language modules are frequently embedded within multidisciplinary programmes (e.g., business, law, and translation) (). As a result, Irish CFL programmes increasingly position intercultural learning as a priority, often relying on short-term mobility experiences to support students' intercultural development.
In this study, study abroad is defined as an academic experience through which students fulfill degree requirements via educational activities undertaken outside their home country (). Blended learning refers to the deliberate integration of face-to-face instruction with online learning supported by internet technologies (). The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted conventional mobility worldwide and accelerated interest in online and blended alternatives, highlighting both opportunities for access and persistent challenges such as reduced peer contact and limited social engagement (). These developments underscore the need to examine culturally responsive pedagogies that can foster intercultural learning within blended study abroad settings.
1.2 Rationale for the research
ICC can be understood as the capability to interact effectively and appropriately with people from different cultural backgrounds (). In language education, research has long argued that intercultural learning is strengthened when language instruction is integrated with culturally responsive pedagogies rather than treated as an “add-on” (). For example, Gu (2015) shows that purposeful cultural activities can support learners' intercultural development in classroom contexts. However, in Irish higher education—particularly within beginner-level CFL programmes delivered through short-term blended study abroad—there remains limited empirical evidence on how structured, experiential cultural learning can be designed and evaluated.
Post-pandemic research agendas increasingly focus on blended and online mobility models and their implications for intercultural learning (). Responding to this gap, the present protocol examines whether experiential Chinese cultural workshops embedded within an 11-week blended CFL course can support ICC development across cognitive and affective domains. Conceptually, Byram's ICC model is used to operationalise teachable and observable ICC components (the five “savoirs”), while Deardorff's work informs the interpretation of ICC as an interactional competence that develops through iterative engagement, reflection, and practice (; ).
1.3 Research context and setting: the Chinese programme
The study is situated in a private higher education institution in Dublin, Ireland, offering a one-semester study abroad programme in which a foreign language module is available as an elective for International Business students. Since 2018, students have been able to select Mandarin Chinese or Spanish. The beginner Mandarin course typically enrolls 20–30 students per semester, most with no prior Chinese learning experience. The cohort is internationally diverse, including students from multiple European countries (e.g., Germany and Greece). The module is delivered in a blended format over 11 weeks, with weekly 3-h sessions combining synchronous face-to-face teaching and asynchronous online learning. Consistent with the programme's intended learning outcomes, the module aims to develop students' ICC through integrated language-and-culture learning.
Module evaluation data and student feedback from the January 2022 cohort informed a subsequent redesign. Two recurring challenges were identified: (1) limited opportunities for cultural immersion and authentic interaction when learning Chinese in Ireland, and (2) difficulties establishing sustained peer interaction and social cohesion within a blended learning environment, particularly during synchronous online elements. In response, the module was redesigned in September 2022 to include five experiential cultural workshops across the 11-week course (Chinese New Year Festival, Chinese Dining Etiquette, Traditional Chinese Medicine, Calligraphy, and Chinese Tea Ceremony). The workshops emphasize hands-on engagement with cultural artifacts, guided input (including a wellbeing-focused guest session with Tai Chi demonstration), and structured reflection through assessed online reflective logs.
1.4 Research aim and questions
This protocol investigates whether experiential cultural workshops embedded within a blended beginner CFL study abroad module are associated with changes in learners' ICC, and how learners describe the mechanisms and learning conditions through which any development occurs.
1.4.1 Primary research question
To what extent are experiential cultural workshops associated with changes in intercultural communicative competence among beginner-level CFL learners in a blended study abroad environment?
1.4.2 Secondary research questions
What changes (if any) are observed in ICC across cognitive and affective domains from pre-course to post-course measurement?
Which components of Byram's ICC model (knowledge; skills of interpreting/relating; skills of discovery/interaction; critical cultural awareness; attitudes) show the strongest evidence of development?
How do learners describe the role of experiential cultural workshops in supporting their intercultural learning?
How do learners perceive the blended learning format in relation to intercultural learning and peer interaction?
What implications do the findings have for designing culturally responsive pedagogies in blended CFL study abroad programmes?
1.5 Research method
This study adopts a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design, prioritizing quantitative evidence in Phase 1 and using qualitative data in Phase 2 to explain, elaborate, and contextualize the quantitative patterns (; ; ). The design aligns with the study aims because it enables (a) an estimate of pre–post change within one cohort and (b) an interpretation of how learners experience workshops and blended learning conditions that may underpin observed patterns.
Phase 1 uses a one-group pre–post approach to examine within-cohort change over the 11-week course. Phase 2 uses purposive sampling informed by Phase 1 patterns (e.g., typical cases and outliers) to explore learners' accounts of intercultural learning processes and perceived enabling/limiting conditions. Integration occurs through connecting (using Phase 1 results to inform Phase 2 sampling and interview foci) and through merged interpretation when reporting how qualitative themes help explain quantitative trends.
1.6 Significance
This protocol contributes to research and practice in three ways. First, it extends the limited evidence base on ICC development among beginner-level CFL learners in Irish higher education contexts, where research has more often focused on English or long-established European language settings. Second, it responds to an emerging need to understand intercultural learning within blended study abroad models, which are increasingly used alongside (or in place of) traditional mobility formats. Third, it offers a structured, replicable approach to embedding experiential cultural workshops into a blended CFL module and evaluating their contribution to ICC development using triangulated evidence. The findings are intended to inform culturally responsive curriculum design in short-term blended study abroad programmes and to support educators in implementing workshop-based intercultural pedagogy with clearer evaluative logic.
2 Literature review
2.1 Intercultural communicative competence in study abroad programmes
Over the past decade, intercultural communicative competence (ICC) has become increasingly central to research on study abroad and foreign language education. Diller and distinguish two broad approaches to cultural competence development, namely pedagogical and psychological perspectives, which include attention to intercultural learning outcomes and intercultural sensitivity. In language education, scholars have emphasized that ICC involves not only knowledge about culturally different others, but also an understanding of how language mediates intercultural encounters and the development of critical thinking to evaluate cultural difference (; ). These strands collectively support the argument that ICC should be developed through explicit pedagogical design rather than assumed as a by-product of mobility.
and define ICC as the capacity to interact effectively with people from different cultural backgrounds whilst using a second language, with an emphasis on establishing and maintaining relationships rather than simply exchanging information. In parallel, policy and curriculum frameworks in language education have increasingly foregrounded intercultural learning aims. For example, the CEFR and its later developments highlight the intercultural dimension of language learning and the value of engaging with diverse beliefs and practices (). Similarly, and position intercultural learning outcomes as important elements of language education. In Ireland, Languages Connect: Ireland's Plan for Foreign Languages in Education 2017–2026 also emphasizes linguistic and intercultural competencies across education sectors, which is aligned with the broader prominence of mobility and internationalization in higher education.
At the same time, research cautions against equating linguistic competence or overseas experience with ICC development. Learners often require structured opportunities to engage with cultural content and to reflect critically on intercultural experiences (; ). further argues that assessing ICC needs to capture skills, attitudes, and cultural awareness, rather than only measuring knowledge acquisition. Empirical studies increasingly challenge the “immersion assumption”. , drawing on interviews with Hong Kong and Mainland Chinese short-term exchange students, shows that overseas experience alone is frequently insufficient for the development of intercultural sensitivity and global awareness. longitudinal study of Japanese students in Hungary similarly indicates that authentic social interaction—such as visits to local homes and sustained networking with local and international peers—supports intercultural growth and critical cultural awareness. However, research on ICC development among CFL learners in Irish study abroad contexts remain limited. This gap suggests a need to examine how ICC develops for CFL students in short-term blended study abroad experiences in Irish higher education institutions.
2.2 Pedagogical tools in developing ICC: the role of cultural experiential workshops in the CFL classroom
Language and culture are fundamentally interdependent, and this relationship is central to ICC development in language education (Wang et al., 2022). suggests that ICC development does not necessarily progress in parallel with linguistic proficiency, which strengthens the rationale for integrating culture through holistic, dynamic, reflective, and critical pedagogical approaches (). Yet study abroad research has historically been dominated by Western language contexts, particularly English and American cultures (). As a result, learner-centered research on Chinese culture learning and teaching in Irish CFL study abroad contexts remains underdeveloped.
Within this landscape, ICC pedagogical tools—classroom resources and instructional strategies designed to develop intercultural competence—become especially important (). Experiential cultural workshops have been proposed as a potentially effective tool in CFL education (Yun, 2022), but prior research also highlights limitations in how “culture” is operationalised. , for instance, reports that although teachers recognize the importance of cultural learning, classroom practice may become narrowly artifact-focused, risking superficial engagement with culture. uses classroom observations, interviews, and reflective journals to examine intercultural activity in CFL teaching for international university students in China, yet the study offers less direct insight into learners' self-assessments and perspectives on effectiveness. Wang (2017) further cautions that cultural events may reinforce stereotypes when symbolic cultural elements are over-emphasized, indicating the need for culturally responsive pedagogy that supports deeper intercultural understanding.
examines the construction of Chinese culture in UK educational contexts and reports that students value experiential cultural activities, which supports arguments for integrating culturally responsive learning opportunities into CFL courses. However, synthesis across studies (; ; Yun, 2022) indicates that implementing intercultural activities in CFL remains pedagogically challenging and that evidence on “what works, for whom, and under which conditions” remains incomplete. These gaps strengthen the rationale for research that links workshop design explicitly to ICC dimensions and evaluates learning outcomes using multiple forms of evidence.
2.3 Blended learning in CFL
Blended learning combines online and face-to-face instruction by integrating synchronous and asynchronous learning modes (; ). In CFL education, adoption of blended learning accelerated during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, and learners increasingly rely on technology to access language and cultural learning content (Wang et al., 2022). Blended learning can be valuable in study abroad contexts because it offers flexibility and additional channels for interaction and reflection, whilst retaining structured pedagogical support.
Nevertheless, the evidence base for ICC development in blended CFL contexts remains limited. Wang and Devitt (2022) report that, within the literature on computer-mediated communication in CFL (2008–2022), relatively few studies use blended learning as an explicit theoretical framework. examine a three-phase blended CFL programme in Japan, and explore Web 2.0 tools in CFL instruction, yet both focus primarily on linguistic outcomes, learner autonomy, and motivation rather than offering sustained analysis of intercultural competence development or interactional processes. combine Moodle-enabled blended learning with international virtual exchange and report positive learner experiences and increased motivation and cross-cultural sensitivity. Even so, research that examines ICC development in blended study abroad contexts—particularly within European higher education settings—remains underdeveloped, supporting the need for further investigation.
2.4 Theoretical conceptual framework
This study draws on two complementary theoretical frameworks to examine ICC development through experiential cultural workshops in a blended CFL context: model of intercultural communicative competence and Experiential Learning Theory (ELT). Together, these frameworks clarify both the intended intercultural learning outcomes and the pedagogical processes through which workshop-based learning may support those outcomes.
Byram's ICC model conceptualizes ICC as the ability to relate to and communicate effectively with people who speak a different language and live in different cultural contexts (, ). The model comprises five interdependent dimensions (the “savoirs”): attitudes (savoir être), knowledge (savoirs), skills of interpreting and relating (savoir comprendre), skills of discovery and interaction (savoir apprendre/faire), and critical cultural awareness (savoir s'engager). These dimensions provide an explicit structure for mapping workshop objectives to ICC development and for interpreting how learners describe changes in intercultural understanding and engagement.
Kolb's ELT complements Byram's model by explaining how learning may occur through a cyclical process of concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation (). In this study, the cultural workshops provide structured cultural experiences, reflective logs support systematic reflection, and learners are encouraged to connect experiences to intercultural concepts and apply emerging understanding in subsequent interactions within the blended learning environment. The integration of Byram's ICC model and Kolb's ELT therefore provides a coherent basis for aligning workshop design, data collection, and interpretation of ICC development in this protocol.
3 Methodological approach (revised)
3.1 Study design and rationale
This study is a single-case mixed-methods protocol situated in an 11-week blended Chinese-as-a-foreign-language (CFL) module within a short-term study abroad programme at an Irish private higher education institution. The design addresses a common challenge in language education settings where intercultural communicative competence (ICC) is an intended outcome, yet opportunities for immersion and sustained intercultural interaction are constrained. A mixed-methods approach is used to examine change in students' self-reported ICC across the course and explain how students experience, interpret and enact intercultural learning through experiential cultural workshops in a blended learning environment.
This research will include several elements, which may be summarized in Table 1.
Table 1
| Component | Analysis | Type of data collection methods |
|---|---|---|
| Literature review analysis | Descriptive | Peer-reviewed literature review on ICC, cultural workshops, and blended learning |
| Qualitative analysis | Inferential | ICC Self-assessment survey (pre-test and post-test), survey on learning chinese culture through experiential cultural workshops (post-test) |
| Qualitative analysis | Interpretive | Interviews with students, analysis of students' reflective blogs, coding transcriptions of Zoom classes |
Summarized research elements.
3.2 Mixed-methods design type and integration plan
The study adopts a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design (QUAN → qual). Phase 1 prioritizes quantitative evidence of pre–post change in ICC. Phase 2 then uses qualitative data to explain, elaborate and contextualize the Phase 1 patterns (for example, domains showing stronger or weaker change, and individual variation). Integration occurs in two planned ways. First, connecting is used, whereby Phase 1 results inform the purposive sampling strategy and shape the Phase 2 interview prompts. Second, merging is used at interpretation, by bringing quantitative results and qualitative themes together (e.g., in a joint narrative or joint display) to identify convergence, divergence and plausible pedagogical mechanisms.
To strengthen transparency and replicability, a table will be added linking each research question to its primary data source(s) and analytic approach, as recommended in the reviewer feedback.
3.3 Participants, setting, and sampling
Phase 1 will include the full cohort enrolled on the beginner Mandarin module (expected n = 20–30 per semester). Phase 2 will draw on purposive sampling from Phase 1 participants who provide consent for qualitative participation and recording use, with an expected interview sub-sample of approximately 10–12 students. Sampling will be structured to capture variation indicated by Phase 1 results (e.g., higher and lower ICC change scores and contrasting domain profiles), supporting explanation rather than representativeness.
3.4 Quantitative strand: instruments and analysis plan (see Appendix 1)
3.4.1 Instruments
ICC will be assessed using the Student's Intercultural Communicative Competence Self-Assessment (SISA) administered at the beginning and end of the 11-week module. A short post-course cultural learning assessment (post-test) and/or workshop feedback items will be used to capture students' perceptions of the cultural workshops and course experience, complementing the pre–post ICC measurement.
3.4.2 Analysis
Quantitative analysis will proceed in three steps. First, descriptive statistics will summarize the sample and overall score distributions, and internal consistency reliability will be reported for the instrument in the target sample (e.g., Cronbach's alpha and, where appropriate, omega). Second, pre–post differences will be tested using paired-samples t-tests when assumptions are met, and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests when normality is not supported. Third, effect sizes will be reported (e.g., Cohen's d for parametric tests or an appropriate non-parametric effect size such as rank-biserial correlation), alongside confidence intervals where feasible.
Missing data and attrition will be handled transparently. The primary analysis will use paired cases with complete pre–post data; the extent and pattern of missingness will be reported, and the potential for bias discussed (e.g., social desirability responding and expectancy effects). Given the one-group pre–post design, results will be interpreted as evidence of change over time rather than causal attribution to the intervention.
3.5 Qualitative strand: data sources and analysis plan
3.5.1 Data sources
Three qualitative sources will be used: (i) semi-structured interviews, (ii) students' reflective blogs produced during or after the workshops, and (iii) Zoom classroom/workshop recordings. Together these sources allow triangulation between reported perceptions (interviews), reflective meaning-making over time (blogs), and observable interactional episodes (recordings).
3.5.2 Interviews
Semi-structured interviews will be conducted after Phase 1 analysis to enable the interview guide to be informed by quantitative results (connecting integration). Interviews will explore students' experiences of the workshops, perceived ICC development, and the affordances and constraints of the blended learning format for intercultural learning and peer interaction. Interview questions will be piloted for clarity and accessibility (particularly important in multilingual cohorts) and refined before full deployment.
3.5.3 Reflective blogs and recordings
Reflective blogs will be analyzed as accounts of learning processes and shifts in interpretation, including moments where assumptions are questioned or perspectives broaden. Zoom recordings will be sampled purposively to capture culturally salient episodes (e.g., task-based discussion, artifact work, peer explanation, negotiation of meaning), providing behavioral/contextual evidence that complements self-report measures.
3.5.4 Qualitative analysis
Qualitative data will be analyzed using a systematic thematic approach with a transparent audit trail (coding decisions, theme development and exemplar extracts). Themes will be organized to address the research questions and to interpret Phase 1 patterns (e.g., why certain ICC domains show stronger change; how workshop design features support or constrain development). Triangulation will be reported by indicating where data sources converge or diverge and how these patterns inform interpretation.
3.6 Ethical approval, consent, confidentiality and power dynamics
This protocol involves human participants (students) and includes surveys, interviews, reflective writing and classroom/workshop recordings; therefore, the manuscript will include a full ethics statement consistent with Frontiers' human-participant requirements. Specifically, the Methods section will state the ethics committee review/approval (or formal exemption/waiver), written informed consent procedures, participants' right to withdraw without penalty, and safeguards for confidentiality and anonymisation (including de-identification of transcripts and removal of identifying details). Data will be stored securely with access restricted to the research team, and retention will follow institutional policy.
Given the teacher–researcher relationship, additional steps will be stated to mitigate power dynamics, including: participation being voluntary and separate from assessment decisions; alternative learning activities available without disadvantage; explicit consent for recording use; and recruitment/consent processes structured to minimize perceived coercion.
4 Data analysis process
Quantitative data from the Students' Intercultural Communicative Competence Self-Assessment (SISA) survey and the post-workshop survey will be analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 27). Analyses will be conducted at the overall ICC level and across Byram's five ICC dimensions: knowledge; skills of interpreting and relating; skills of discovery and interaction; critical cultural awareness; and attitudes. For both pre-test and post-test administrations, descriptive statistics (means, standard deviations, and score distributions) will be produced, with Tables 2, 3 and supporting tables used to summarize patterns of change.
Table 2
| ICC domains | Number of items | Cronbach alpha |
|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | 29 | 0.93 |
| Skills | 13 | 0.84 |
Survey of student, intercultural competence ().
Table 3
| Interpretation Scale for Mean Score | |
|---|---|
| Mean Score | Interpretation |
| 1.00–1.89 | Very low |
| 1.90–2.69 | Low |
| 2.70–3.49 | Average |
| 3.50–4.29 | High |
| 4.30–5.00 | Very high |
Interpretation scale for mean score.
4.1 Quantitative data analysis process
Following Cohen, Manion and Morrison's guidance on using statistical software to generate and report descriptive outputs, survey responses will be processed in SPSS to produce the required descriptive statistics. Taylor and Francis Mean scores will then be interpreted using a five-category scale adapted from and prior studies adopting similar cut-points (see Tables 2, 3), ranging from very low to extremely high.
To examine pre–post change, paired-samples t-tests will be conducted when distributional assumptions are acceptable. Normality will be checked using the Shapiro–Wilk test; where assumptions are not supported, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests will be used. Statistical significance will be set at p < 0.05. Given the small cohort size and multiple comparisons across ICC dimensions, interpretation will prioritize effect sizes and the pattern of results across measures rather than p-values alone.
Effect sizes will be reported alongside p-values to support interpretation of practical significance. Cohen's d will be reported for paired t-tests, and rank-biserial correlation will be reported for Wilcoxon tests. These effect-size estimates will be interpreted in relation to the educational context and the one-group design rather than as definitive evidence of intervention impact.
Internal consistency of the SISA instrument in the target sample will be examined and reported for the overall scale and, where appropriate, for each ICC dimension using Cronbach's alpha (α). Reliability estimates will be interpreted with attention to the small sample size and the characteristics of the cohort.
Missing data and attrition will be documented transparently. The primary pre–post analysis will be conducted using paired cases with complete pre- and post-test scores. The proportion and pattern of missingness will be reported, and sensitivity checks will be conducted where feasible to assess whether conclusions change under different reasonable handling decisions. Attrition rates will be calculated and any available reasons for attrition will be summarized to support assessment of potential bias.
Potential sources of bias will be acknowledged when interpreting quantitative findings, including social desirability responding, expectancy effects, and limitations inherent to self-report measurement of ICC. These limitations will be addressed through triangulation with qualitative and observational data sources in Phase 2.
4.2 Qualitative data analysis
Qualitative data from semi-structured interview transcripts, reflective blog entries, and selected excerpts from Zoom class recordings will be analyzed using thematic analysis following six-stage approach, supported by NVivo (version 12). Familiarization will involve repeated reading and initial memoing to capture early patterns relevant to ICC development and learning processes. Initial coding will be conducted systematically across the dataset. Coding will combine (i) inductive codes that arise from participants' accounts and (ii) deductive codes informed by Byram's five ICC dimensions and Kolb's experiential learning cycle, reflecting the study's stated theoretical frameworks. Pasted Codes will be grouped into candidate themes that explain how learners describe (and demonstrate) intercultural learning through workshops and within the blended learning environment. Themes will be reviewed against the coded extracts and the full dataset, refined for coherence and distinctiveness, and then defined and named with clear links to the research questions. Reporting will use anonymised illustrative extracts to demonstrate how themes support interpretation.
To strengthen credibility, three procedures will be implemented. First, a subset of the interview data (approximately 20%) will be independently coded by a second coder, with discrepancies resolved through discussion to refine the coding frame. Second, a brief summary of preliminary themes (approximately 1–2 pages) will be shared with a small number of participants for feedback on interpretive resonance. Third, triangulation will be used to compare themes across interviews, blogs, and recorded classroom interactions, noting convergence and divergence across data sources.
4.3 Validity, credibility, and data integration
Methodological triangulation across surveys, interviews, blogs, and recorded sessions will be used to strengthen the trustworthiness of findings. The limitations of the one-group pre-test/post-test design will be stated explicitly. Without a comparison group, observed changes cannot be attributed causally to the workshops, and alternative explanations (e.g., maturation, testing effects, concurrent experiences, and regression to the mean) remain possible.
The reliance on self-report data (SISA) will be addressed by incorporating reflective and observational evidence. Zoom recordings and blogs will be treated as observational/interactional and reflective evidence that can contextualize self-assessments (for example, by identifying instances of comparison, negotiation of meaning, perspective-taking, or critical reflection aligned with ICC dimensions), rather than as “objective” measures.
The teacher–researcher dual role will be managed through explicit safeguards described in the ethics section (voluntary participation, separation from grading decisions, clear consent for recording use, right to withdraw, and anonymisation). Reflexive documentation (e.g., a researcher journal and analytic memos) will be used to record decisions and potential influences throughout analysis.
Integration of quantitative and qualitative findings will proceed through (1) connecting, where Phase 1 patterns inform Phase 2 sampling and interview focus, and (2) merging, where results are brought together during interpretation. A joint display (table or figure) will be used to align quantitative changes by ICC dimension with the qualitative themes and supporting excerpts, enabling transparent identification of convergence, complementarity, and divergence.
5 Ethical considerations
This study will adhere to the highest ethical standards, with all procedures designed to protect the rights, dignity, and wellbeing of participants. Ethical approval for this research has been obtained from the [Institution Ethics Committee] (Reference: [Reference Number]). The study will be conducted in accordance with the ethical guidelines of the British Educational Research Association () and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
5.1 Informed consent and right to withdraw
Informed consent will be obtained from all participants prior to their involvement in the study. A detailed information sheet will be provided to all potential participants, outlining the purpose of the research, the nature of their involvement, the data collection procedures, the potential benefits and risks, and the measures taken to ensure confidentiality and data protection. Participants will be explicitly informed that their participation is voluntary and that they have the right to withdraw from the study at any time without penalty or consequence. Written consent will be obtained from all participants before any data is collected. For online surveys, consent will be obtained through a checkbox at the beginning of the survey, confirming that participants have read and understood the information sheet and agree to participate.
5.2 Confidentiality and data protection
To ensure confidentiality, all participants will be assigned pseudonyms, and any identifying information will be removed from transcripts, blog entries, and other data. Data will be stored securely on a password-protected and encrypted computer, with access restricted to the research team. Audio recordings of interviews will be transcribed and then deleted. All data will be stored for a minimum of 5 years following the completion of the study, in accordance with institutional policy. The data will be used for research purposes only and will not be shared with any third parties without the explicit consent of participants.
5.3 Power dynamics and researcher positionality
The researcher's dual role as teacher and researcher presents potential power dynamics that could influence participant responses and create a sense of obligation to participate. To mitigate this, several measures will be taken. First, participants will be explicitly informed that their decision to participate or not participate will have no impact on their course grades or their relationship with the researcher. Second, the researcher will engage in reflexive practices, including maintaining a research journal to document reflections on the research process, potential biases, and decisions made during analysis. Third, regular debriefing sessions will be held with a co-researcher to discuss potential biases and alternative interpretations of data. These measures will help to ensure that the research is conducted in an ethical and transparent manner, and that the findings are not unduly influenced by the researcher's positionality.
5.4 Beneficence and minimization of harm
The study is designed to maximize benefits for participants and minimize potential harm. The primary benefit for participants is the opportunity to engage in experiential cultural workshops that may enhance their intercultural communicative competence and their understanding of Chinese culture. The research findings will also contribute to the broader field of language education, with potential benefits for educators, curriculum designers, and policymakers. Potential risks are minimal and may include discomfort during interviews when discussing personal experiences or reflections. To minimize this risk, participants will be informed that they can decline to answer any questions they are not comfortable with and can stop the interview at any time. The researcher will also be sensitive to participants' emotional wellbeing and will provide support and resources if needed.
5.5 Transparency and accountability
Transparency and accountability will be maintained throughout the research process. The research protocol will be pre-registered, and the findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. A summary of the findings will be made available to participants upon request. The research will be conducted in accordance with the ethical guidelines of the British Educational Research Association (), which emphasize the importance of integrity, honesty, and respect in educational research. The researcher will be accountable to the participants, the institution, and the broader research community for the ethical conduct of the study.
6 Limitations
This case-study protocol has several limitations that should be considered when interpreting findings and planning subsequent research. The one-group pre–post design does not include a comparison group, which constrains causal interpretation. Any observed change in ICC may reflect multiple influences (e.g., maturation, course exposure, testing effects, or concurrent intercultural experiences) rather than the workshops alone. Interpretation will therefore emphasize change patterns over time within this cohort rather than attributing effects to the intervention.
ICC is a complex construct and the protocol relies substantially on self-report measures (SISA and workshop feedback), which are vulnerable to social desirability and expectancy effects. To strengthen interpretive validity, survey findings are triangulated with interviews, reflective blogs, and selected excerpts from Zoom session recordings. These qualitative sources can illuminate learning processes and interactional episodes aligned with ICC dimensions, while remaining socially situated evidence rather than “objective” measurement.
The study is confined to a single cohort in one private higher education institution, with a relatively small sample size and a short time span. The results are therefore best understood as context-sensitive insights rather than generalisable claims across Irish higher education or other language programmes. The Dublin study abroad setting may shape opportunities for intercultural contact in ways that differ from other Irish locations. Replication across additional cohorts, public universities, and cross-national contexts, as well as longitudinal follow-up, would strengthen transferability and help assess the durability of any ICC-related changes.
Pedagogical and implementation factors may also limit interpretability. Although the workshops are embedded across the module, variation in facilitation, pacing, scaffolding, and group dynamics could influence learners' experiences and outcomes. The protocol focuses primarily on learners' accounts and does not systematically incorporate instructors' perspectives or structured fidelity checks. Future research could add teacher perspectives and documentation of workshop delivery (e.g., task prompts used, time-on-task, and intended vs. enacted learning activities) to improve replicability and strengthen links between pedagogical design and observed outcomes.
The protocol also concentrates on workshop-related learning within the course context. Technology-mediated intercultural experiences beyond the module—such as students' social networks and online intercultural encounters—are not examined in depth here. Extending the design to include narrative or longitudinal approaches could capture a wider range of intercultural trajectories and provide more granular insight into learners with lower initial ICC profiles (; ).
7 Timeline
A proposed project timeline is presented in (Table 4), informed by established guidance on mixed-methods sequencing and thematic analysis (; ; ). Following ethics approval, survey instruments (SISA and the cultural learning measures) will be finalized and piloted prior to Phase 1 (quantitative) data collection. Phase 1 consists of pre–post survey administration across the 11-week blended module, followed by data preparation and analysis (including inferential testing where appropriate, effect size estimation, and reliability checks). Phase 2 (qualitative) will then proceed using purposive sampling informed by Phase 1 patterns to guide interviews and the selection of reflective blogs and consented Zoom excerpts for thematic analysis. A final integration stage will connect the quantitative and qualitative strands through joint displays and narrative weaving to address the research questions coherently.
Table 4
| Study phase | Task | Indicative duration |
|---|---|---|
| Preparatory stage | Ethics approval (application, participant information/consent materials, data management and GDPR plan) | 4 weeks |
| Preparatory stage | Finalize instruments (SISA pre/post; cultural learning measures); set up online survey platform | 2–4 weeks |
| Preparatory stage | Pilot and revise surveys (clarity, completion time, item wording) | 2–4 weeks |
| Phase 1: quantitative (QUAN) | Pre-course survey administration (SISA pre-test) | 1 week |
| Phase 1: quantitative (QUAN) | Delivery of the 11-week blended module with embedded cultural workshops | 11 weeks |
| Phase 1: quantitative (QUAN) | Post-course survey administration (SISA post-test + cultural learning post-test/workshop feedback) | 1 week |
| Phase 1: quantitative (QUAN) | Data preparation (coding, missingness/attrition log, assumption checks) | 1–2 weeks |
| Phase 1: quantitative (QUAN) | Quantitative analysis (descriptives; paired t-test/Wilcoxon as appropriate; effect sizes; reliability checks) | 3–4 weeks |
| Phase 2: qualitative (qual) | Purposive sampling and recruitment informed by Phase 1 results; obtain separate consent for interviews/blogs/recording excerpts | 1–2 weeks |
| Phase 2: qualitative (qual) | Data collection (semi-structured interviews; reflective blogs; selection of consented Zoom excerpts) | 3–6 weeks |
Suggested study project timeline.
The timeline is indicative and may be adjusted to align with the teaching calendar, ethics review timelines, participant access, and practical constraints (e.g., transcription workload). Data collection will not commence.
The Table 2 summarizes preparatory activities (ethics approval, instrument finalization and piloting), Phase 1 quantitative data collection and analysis, Phase 2 qualitative data collection and thematic analysis, and the final mixed-methods integration and reporting stage.
8 Conclusion
This protocol sets out a mixed-methods case study examining how experiential Chinese cultural workshops embedded in an 11-week blended CFL study abroad course relate to learners' intercultural communicative competence (ICC). The study focuses on learners' accounts of intercultural learning and on pre–post changes in self-assessed ICC, complemented by qualitative evidence from interviews, reflective blogs, and selected excerpts from recorded sessions to illuminate learning processes in context.
Given the one-group pre–post design, any observed changes will be interpreted as change over time within this cohort rather than as causal effects of the workshops. The study nevertheless aims to generate a transparent and replicable description of the pedagogical innovation by clarifying workshop objectives, learning tasks, and links to ICC components. Findings are expected to offer practical insights into how culturally responsive, experiential activities can be designed and integrated within blended CFL programmes, including how reflection and peer interaction may support particular dimensions of ICC.
More broadly, the protocol contributes to ongoing discussions about how study abroad provision—especially in blended or hybrid formats—can be structured to support intercultural learning. It also identifies directions for future work, including replication across cohorts and institutions, the inclusion of comparative designs, and longer-term follow-up to examine whether ICC-related changes are sustained.
Statements
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Ethics statement
This article reports a study protocol involving human participants (students). Ethical approval will be sought from the Research Ethics Committee, Dublin Business School, Ireland, prior to recruitment and data collection. Participants will provide informed consent, participation will be voluntary, and withdrawal will be permitted at any time without penalty; course assessment will be independent of research participation. Data will be pseudonymised and stored securely in line with applicable data protection requirements. The manuscript contains no identifiable human images.
Author contributions
JY: Writing – original draft. MM: Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication.
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declared that generative AI was not used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feduc.2026.1731321/full#supplementary-material
References
1
American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (2020). What are the Ncssfl-Actfl Can-Do Statements? Available online at: https://www.actfl.org/uploads/files/general/Resources-Publications/Can-Do-Introduction-2020.pdf (Accessed January 09, 2026).
2
ArasaratnamL. A. (2009). The development of a new instrument of intercultural communication competence. Journal of Intercultural Communication, (20). doi: 10.36923/jicc.v9i2.478
3
BiebricherC.EastM.HowardJ.TolosaC. (2019). Navigating intercultural language teaching in New Zealand classrooms. Camb. J. Educ.49, 605–621. doi: 10.1080/0305764x.2019.1581137
4
BonkC. J.GrahamC. R. (2012). The Handbook of Blended Learning. Hoboken: John Wiley and Sons.
5
BraunV.ClarkeV. (2013). Successful Qualitative Research:A Practical Guide for Beginners. London: SAGE.
6
British Educational Research Association (2018). Ethical Guidelines for Educational Research, 4th Edn. London: British Educational Research Association. Available online at: https://www.bera.ac.uk/publication/ethical-guidelines-for-educational-research-2018 (Accessed January 19, 2026).
7
ByramM. (1997). Teaching and Assessing Intercultural Competence. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
8
ByramM. (2021). Teaching and Assessing Intercultural Communicative Competence: Revisited. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
9
CohenL.ManionL.MorrisonK. (2018). Research Methods in Education, 8th Edn. New York: Routledge.
10
Council of Europe (2020). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11
CreswellJ. W.Plano ClarkV. L. (2011). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research, 2nd Edn.Los Angeles: Sage.
12
DeardorffD. K. (2006). “Assessing Intercultural Competence in Study Abroad Students,” in: Living and Studying Abroad: Research and Practice (eds). M. Byram and A. Feng (Clevedon: Multilingual Matters), 232–256.
13
DenscombeM. (2014). The Good Research Guide. Maidenhead: Open University Press.
14
DeweyD. P.BownJ.BakerW.MartinsenR. A.GoldC.EggettD. (2013). Language use in six study abroad programs: an exploratory analysis of possible predictors. Lang. Learn.64, 36–71. doi: 10.1111/lang.12031
15
DeWittD.ChanS. F.LobanR. (2022). Virtual reality for developing intercultural communication competence in Mandarin as a foreign language. Educ. Tech. Res. Dev.70, 1–18. doi: 10.1007/s11423-021-10074-9
16
EastM. (2012). Addressing the intercultural via task-based language teaching: possibility or problem?Lang. Intercult. Commun.12, 56–73. doi: 10.1080/14708477.2011.626861
17
FantiniA. E. (2009). “Assessing Intercultural Competence,” in the Sage Handbook of Intercultural Competence, (ed). D. K. (Deardorff Thousand Oaks: Sage). 456–476.
18
GanassinS. (2019). Teaching and learning about Chinese culture: pupils' and teachers' experiences of Chinese community schooling in the UK. Lang. Intercult. Commun.19, 167–183. doi: 10.1080/14708477.2018.1504953
19
Godwin-JonesR. (2013). Integrating intercultural competence into language learning through technology. Lang. Learn. Technol.17, 1–11. doi: 10.64152/10125/44318
20
GrahamC. R. (2012). “Blended Learning Systems: Definition, Current Trends, and Future Directions,” in the Handbook of Blended Learning: Global Perspectives, Local Designs, (Eds). C. J. Bonk and C. R. Graham (San Francisco: Pfeiffer Publishing), 3–21.
21
HuangC.-K.LinC.-Y. (2011). Enhancing classroom interactivity and engagement: CFL learners'perceptions of the application of Web 2.0 technology. Br. J. Educ. Technol.42, 141–144. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01219.x
22
JacksonJ. (2009). Intercultural learning on short-term sojourns. Intercult. Educ.20, S59–S71. doi: 10.1080/14675980903370870
23
JacksonJ. (2017). Intervening in the intercultural learning of L2 study abroad students: from research to practice. Lang. Teach.51, 365–382. doi: 10.1017/S0261444816000392
24
KolbD. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
25
KramschC. (2011). “Theorizing translingual/transcultural competence,” in Critical and Intercultural Theory and Language Pedagogy (Eds). F. D. Giacomo and T. Jin. London: Routledge.
26
LeeJ. (2019). Developing intercultural competence through study abroad, telecollaboration, and on-campus language study. Lang. Learn. Tech.23, 178–198. doi: 10.64152/10125/44702
27
LiddicoatA. J.ScarinoA. (2013). Intercultural Language Teaching and Learning.Hoboken: John Wiley and Sons.
28
LiuN. (2022). Integrating intercultural activities into teaching Mandarin for international students in China. Front. Psychol.13:972733. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.972733
29
LiuY.ShirleyT. (2021). Without crossing a border: exploring the impact of shifting study abroad online on students' learning and intercultural competence development during the COVID-19 pandemic. Online Learn.25:1. doi: 10.24059/olj.v25i1.2471
30
LomickaL.DucateL. (2019). Using technology, reflection, and noticing to promote intercultural learning during short-term study abroad. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 34, 35–65. doi: 10.1080/09588221.2019.1640746
31
McGregorJ.PlewsJ. L. (2022). Designing Second Language Study Abroad Research: Critical Reflections on Methods and Data. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
32
MoloneyR. A. (2013). Providing a bridge to intercultural pedagogy for native speaker teachers of Chinese in Australia. Lang. Cult. Curric.26, 213–228. doi: 10.1080/07908318.2013.829081
33
MouleJ.DillerJ. V. (2005). Cultural Competence: a Primer for Educators. Belmont, CA: Thompson Wadsworth.
34
OECD (2023). International Student Mobility. Available online at: https://doi.org/10.1787/4bcf6fc3-en
35
OranjeJ. M. (2016). Intercultural Communicative Language Teaching: Enhancing Awareness and Practice Through Cultural Portfolio Projects. Doctoral Dissertation. Dunedin, New Zealand: University of Otago. Available online at: https://ourarchive.otago.ac.nz/handle/10523/6295 (Accessed January 09, 2026).
36
OsborneC.ZhangQ.XiaY. (2019). The past and present of Chinese language teaching in Ireland. CLTMT2:32. Available online at: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/cltmt/vol2/iss1/4 (Accessed January 09, 2026).
37
PinarA. (2016). Second language acquisition in a study abroad context:findings and research directions. Colomb. Appl. Linguist. J.18:83. doi: 10.14483/calj.v18n2.9480
38
QuM.HagleyE. (2021). Evaluating the impact of virtual exchange on a Chinese language class in Japan. J. Technol. Chin. Lang. Teach.12, 49–65.
39
SanzC.Morales-FrontA. (2018). The Routledge Handbook of Study Abroad Research and Practice. New York, NY: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781315639970
40
SugieS.MitsugiM. (2014). Practice and evaluation of blended learning with cross-cultural distance learning in a foreign language class: using mixed methods data analysis. J. PAAL18, 1–19. Available online at: http://hdl.handle.net/2115/63945 (Accessed January 12, 2026).
41
SvanholmA.G. (2020). The Impact of COVID-19 on Study Abroad: Oct 2020 Survey Results. Available online at: https://institutions.educations.com/insights/the-impact-of-covid-19-on-study-abroad-oct-2020-survey-results (Accessed January 2, 2026).
42
TanabeJ. (2019). Japanese Students' Intercultural Gains in a Study Abroad Context. Argumentum, 15, 421–446. Available online at: https://argumentum.unideb.hu/2019-anyagok/special_issue_I/tanabej.pdf
43
The Office of Chinese Language Council International (2010). International Curriculum for Chinese Language Education, 5th Edn. Beijing: Beijing Language and Culture University Press.
44
WangD. (2017). Developing intercultural competence through cultural activities in London Chinese complementary schools. in Interculturality in Chinese Language Teaching: Theories and Practices, (Eds). T. Jin and F. Dervin (London: Palgrave Macmillan), 131–150.
45
WangM.DevittA. (2022). A systematic review of computer-mediated communications in Chinese as a foreign language from 2008 to 2022: research contexts, theoretical foundations and methodology, affordances and limitations. Lang. Teach. Res.30:136216882211324. doi: 10.1177/13621688221132475
46
WangY.WeiP.-L.NguyenV. T. (2022). An exploratory intervention program on Chinese culture among CFL students at a Vietnamese university. Educ. Sci.12:887. doi: 10.3390/educsci12120887
47
YunX. (2022). Investigating Chinese as a Foreign Language Learners' Development of Intercultural Communicative Competence in the New Zealand Secondary School Context. (PhD thesis). Auckland: University of Auckland. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-35475-5_8
Summary
Keywords
blended learning, Chinese as a foreign language, experiential workshops, intercultural communicative competence, study abroad, study protocol
Citation
Yan J and Michaud M (2026) Enhancing intercultural communicative competence through cultural workshops in a Chinese as a foreign language classroom: a mixed methods study protocol. Front. Educ. 11:1731321. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2026.1731321
Received
23 October 2025
Revised
19 December 2025
Accepted
19 January 2026
Published
17 February 2026
Volume
11 - 2026
Edited by
Anastassia Zabrodskaja, Tallinn University, Estonia
Reviewed by
Diego Apolo Buenaño, Universidad Nacional De Educación - Unae Ecuador, Ecuador
Lenin Esteban Loaiza Dávila, Technical Universitsy of Ambato, Ecuador
Updates
Copyright
© 2026 Yan and Michaud.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Matthew Michaud, mm3400@bath.ac.uk
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.