Strategies for Cultivating Intercultural Communication Skills in English Teaching and Learning

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Bi-directional breakdown of intercultural communicative competence test tools

Primary indicator	Description	Question number	Factor load
Cross-cultural sensitivity	Able to discuss complex social and cultural issues in English (A)	Q1	0.8090
	Be able to express views on certain cross-cultural conflict issues clearly and appropriately in English (B)	Q2	0.7948
	Able to negotiate effectively with partners on cross-cultural conflicts in English (C)	Q3	0.7638
	Able to complete cross-cultural case studies in English in class (D)	Q4	0.7489
	Able to complete cross-cultural case studies in English in class (E)	Q5	0.7287
Cross-cultural sensitivity	Be able to discuss the communication barriers caused by cultural differences with the target audience in English (F)	Q6	0.7023
	Be able to describe the cause, development and outcome of cross-cultural conflict events in English (G)	Q7	0.6868
	Able to grasp English academic materials related to culture (H)	Q8	0.6806
	Can describe the influence of foreign culture shock on Chinese college students in English (I)	Q9	0.6751
	Can achieve natural and fluent intonation in cross-cultural communication (J)	Q10	0.6713
Cross-cultural effectiveness	Able to effectively answer the cultural questions raised by the communicative objects in cross-cultural communication (K)	Q11	0.6488
	Able to pronounce English accurately in cross-cultural communication (L)	Q12	0.6260
	Be able to make valuable comments in English on social media about cross-cultural conflicts (M)	Q13	0.6240
	Can use more complex sentence patterns and cohesive means to discuss international hot issues (N)	Q14	0.5994
	The idea of English material that can understand common cultural topics (O)	Q15	0.5836

Final test - Average ability analysis of different levels in the class

Class	Class 1	Class 2	Class 3
Level 1	-1.6522	1.5113	-1.3034
Level 2	-1.0771	-0.6512	-0.5801
Level 3	0.5038	0.5334	0.5255
Level 4	1.2391	1.7356	1.6737
Level 5	2.0378	2.3818	2.2388
Average class ability	-0.5801	0.1477	0.0087

Statistical values of scale options analysis

Option category	Score	Observed Count	Average Measure	Outfit MnSq	Structure Calibration/logits
1 (Be completely out of reach)	1	6 (10.91%)	0.085	1.818	None
2 (Barely reach)	2	10 (18.18%)	0.413	1.167	-2.309
3 (Basically reach)	3	18 (32.73%)	0.728	1.334	-0.982
4 (better achieved)	4	13 (23.64%)	1.406	1.195	0.808
5 (Completely reach)	5	8 (14.55%)	2.007	2.085	2.534

Final test - The number and proportion of men and women at different levels

Gender	Man	Female
Level 1	18 (26.09%)	18 (21.69%)
Level 2	25 (36.23%)	22 (26.51%)
Level 3	13 (18.84%)	25 (30.12%)
Level 4	12 (17.39%)	16 (19.28%)
Level 5	1 (1.45%)	2 (2.41%)
Total amount	69 (100%)	83 (100%)

Final test - Average ability of men and women at different levels

Gender	Man	Female	Difference value	P
Level 1	-2.0826	-1.7573	0.33	0.000
Level 2	-0.6524	-0.5332	0.12	0.000
Level 3	0.3909	0.4905	0.10	0.000
Level 4	0.6712	0.8899	0.22	0.000
Level 5	2.1008	2.9850	0.88	0.000

Final test - The number and proportion of different levels in the class

Class	Class 1	Class 2	Class 3
Level 1	13 (26.00%)	12 (24.49%)	11 (20.75%)
Level 2	16 (32.00%)	13 (26.53%)	16 (30.19%)
Level 3	11 (22.00%)	15 (30.61%)	14 (26.42%)
Level 4	9 (18.00%)	8 (16.33%)	11 (20.75%)
Level 5	1 (2.00%)	1 (2.04%)	1 (1.89%)
Total class size	50 (100%)	49 (100%)	53 (100%)

The overall statistical analysis results of the preliminary test

		Subject	Item
N		55	15
Difficulty measure		0.5927	0
Standard error (S.E.)		0.3633	0.4575
Infit (weighted fitting)	MNSQ	1.1001	1.0000
	ZSTD	0	0
Outfit (unweighted fitting)	MNSQ	0.9527	0.9527
	ZSTD	0	-0.1
Separation		1.6864	2.8345
Reliability		0.6308	0.8912