As mentioned in Chapter 1, there are a few limitations found in this study. The first one is that the NS and NNS who participated in this study do not work together in schools.
The individuals that they had perceived to have misunderstanding with are not involved in this study. Thus, all of the misunderstandings narrated and obtained from the interviews are considered as their perceptions. The participants might have felt that it was a misunderstanding but it could have been perceived differently by the other person involved. Therefore, it is best to get a response from the person directly involved in the perceived misunderstanding. As a suggestion for future research, data could be obtained from both individuals that are directly involved in the perceived misunderstanding. By obtaining data from both parties involved, more perspectives could be gathered for further analysis.
As this study employs qualitative research method, the findings of this study should not be generalised. Out of the five NS and NNS participants, only a few examples were found to be significant and more examples of narrations and interviews could be collected. Not all participants were able to provide the data required for this study, as in the case of NNS 4. Although some of the findings indicate consistency with previous research and relevant literatures, the findings of this study are only relevant to the context of this particular study. More research needs to be conducted in order to support the findings. In addition, the number of participants in this study is also not sufficient. As a suggestion for future research, a study on a bigger scale could be conducted in order to obtain more information and to make generalisation.
Furthermore, some of the demographic factors in this study could be improved for future research. The present study lacks male participants. There are only two male participants in the NS group and all females from the NNS group. Perspectives from a male NNS teacher could have been different than the female NNS teachers. This factor could be attributed to the lack of male teachers in primary and secondary schools (Ivan, 2015). Discrepancy in gender could have influenced the findings of this study. Therefore, a balanced number of male and female participants are suggested for future research.
Some of the incidents recalled by the participants had occurred for quite some time.
This might have influenced the data obtained from narrations and recollections from the interviews. The participants might have not recalled correctly or might have missed out
could be conducted in a given context whereby the researcher is present to observe for data collection. This may enable the data collected to be more authentic and obtain more information on how misunderstandings occur and resolved from other perspectives such as non-verbal cues, facial expression and tone of voice.
5.5 Conclusion
This study finds that perceived misunderstanding occurs between English native and non-native teachers while working in schools. Factors such as differences in cultural communication style and values might have caused the perceived misunderstanding narrated by the native and non-native English teachers. Some of the perceived misunderstandings were solved by using intercultural conflict management skills such as dialogue, mindful reframing and adaptability and face-saving management. These are some of the skills that could be used to achieve intercultural competence while working in an intercultural context such as the school. Further training on intercultural awareness is recommended for stakeholders for future improvements. In addition, both native and non-native teachers must also equip themselves on knowledge and awareness in developing intercultural competence.
REFERENCES
Abdul Razak, Kamaruddin & Kamarulzaman, Kamaruddin. (2009). Malay culture and consumer decision-making styles: An investigation on religious and ethnic dimensions. Jurnal Kemanusiaan, 14, 37-50.
Aneas, M.A. & Sandin, M.P. (2009). Intercultural and cross-communication research:
Some reflections about culture and qualitative methods. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 10(1), Art. 51, http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0901519
Andersen, P.A. & Wang, H. (2009). Beyond language: Nonverbal communications across culture. In Samorvar, L.A., Porter, R.E. & McDaniel, E.R. (eds.). Intercultural communication. A reader. Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cencage Learning.
Antaki, C. (2008). Discourse analysis and conversation analysis. In Alasuutari, P., Bickman, L., and Brannan, J. (Eds.). The SAGE handbook of social research methods.
London: Sage (pp.431-446).
Asmah Haji Omar (1996). Indirectness as a rule of speaking among Malays. In Loga Baskaran and Zainab Abdul Majid (eds.). Verbal interactions at play. Kuala Lumpur:
Pelanduk Publications.
Asmah Haji Omar (2012). Pragmatics of maintaining English in Malaysia’s education system. In Ee-Ling Low and Azirah Hashim (Eds.). English in the southeast Asia.
Features, policy and language in use. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Arent, R. (2009). An introduction to intercultural communication. Bridging the cross-cultural gap: Listening and Speaking Tasks for Developing Fluency in English.
Michigan ELT.
Avruch, K. (n.d). Cross-cultural conflict. Retrieved November 20, 2016 from
https://www.nottingham.ac.uk/research/groups/ctccs/projects/translating-cultures/documents/journals/cross-cultural-conflict.pdf
Baker, C. (2006). Foundations of bilingual education and bilingualism. 4th Edition.
Clevedon, United Kingdom: Multilingual Matters Ltd.
Bazzanielo, C., & Damiano, R. (1999). The interactional handling of misunderstanding in everyday conversations. Journal of Pragmatics, 31, 817-836
Beal, C. (1990). It is all in the asking: A perspective on problems of cross-cultural communication between native speaker of French and native speaker of Australian English in the workplace. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, Series S, Vol.7, pp.16-32
Bell, A. (1984). Hot Air: Media, Miscommunication and the Climate Change Issue. In In N. Coupland, H. Giles & Wiemann, J.M (Eds.), “Miscommunication” and Problematic Talk (pp.259-264). United States of America: Sage Publications Inc.