Facilitating the co-construction of interculturality in teletandem through pedagogical mediation

Facilitando a co-construção da interculturalidade no teletandem através da mediação pedagógica

ABSTRACT

Telecollaboration relates to the use of online technologies in the context of language teaching and learning (O’Dowd, 2013). This study aimed at discussing how pedagogical mediation can contribute to the co-construction of interculturality in teletandem, the specific “mode of telecollaboration” (Telles, 2015a:604) in my research. Data analysis showed that opportunities for at least initial steps of a decentering attitude (Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013) came about due to pedagogical mediation, which means that teacher-mediators can encourage discussions that go beyond superficial cultural representations in the teletandem context.

Key-words:
Teletandem; telecollaboration; interculturality; pedagogical mediation

RESUMO

A telecolaboração está relacionada com o uso de tecnologias online no contexto de ensino e aprendizagem de línguas (O’Dowd, 2013). O presente estudo teve como objetivo discutir como a mediação pedagógica pode contribuir para a co-construção da interculturalidade no teletandem, o “modelo de telecolaboração” (Telles, 2015a:604, minha tradução) específico nesta pesquisa. A análise dos dados mostrou que oportunidades para pelo menos etapas iniciais de uma atitude de descentralização (Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013) surgiram devido à mediação pedagógica, o que significa dizer que os professores-mediadores podem promover discussões que transcendam representações culturais superficiais no contexto do teletandem.

Key-words:
Teletandem; telecolaboração; interculturalidade; mediação pedagógica

1. Introduction

The advent of the Internet has produced general changes in education and, particularly, in foreign language classroom, since it has expanded the opportunities to practice and learn languages (Schaefer & Luna, 2018). Furthermore, as stated by O’Dowd (2013:123), “one of the major contributions of the internet to foreign language (FL) education has been its potential to bring language learners into virtual contact with members of other cultures and speakers of other languages”. Similarly, Liddicoat and Scarino (2013:119) argue that digital technologies “have the potential to place learners in situation of intercultural communication where they can explore the language and culture they are learning in real world interactions”.

Due to the use of digital technologies, different telecollaborative projects have emerged. O’Dowd (2013:123) defines telecollaboration as “the application of online communication tools to bring together classes of language learners in geographically distant locations to develop their foreign language skills and intercultural competence through collaborative tasks and project work”.

There is the possibility of dealing with intercultural issues in telecollaboration projects (Belz, 2002). For example, The Cultnet Intercultural Citizenship aims at including citizenship education in the teaching and learning of languages through subprojects (Byram, 2016). Another example is The Cultura Exchange Programme, whose objective is to facilitate the intercultural contact between students from different countries (Furstenberg, 2016). In Brazil, the telecollaborative project Teletandem Brasil: foreign languages for all (Telles & Vassallo, 2006; Telles, 2011, 2015a) (henceforward TTB¹), created in 2006 (Telles & Vassallo) and developed by a state university in São Paulo’s countryside, enables college students from Brazil to interact with college students from other countries. In TTB, the online sessions can take place through tools such as Skype² or Zoom³.

Teletandem (Telles & Vassallo, 2006; Vassallo & Telles, 2006; Vassallo, 2009; Telles, 2015a, 2015b) has resources such as voice, image and writing, and can be defined as video conferencing between two interactants⁴ who are learning each other’s language (Vassallo, 2009). The three guiding principles of teletandem are the following: reciprocity, autonomy and separate use of languages (Telles, 2009). Reciprocity, according to Brammerts (1996), refers to mutual support and interdependence between the two language learners, whereas autonomy is related to the commitment of both interactants regarding their own learning process. Separate use of languages, in turn, means that the two languages cannot be mixed (Vassallo & Telles, 2006).

According to Helm (2016:151), in most telecollaborative projects reported in research “teachers organize the communication and tasks, motivate students, monitor activities and provide feedback and support for learners, but the communication between learners is not usually moderated”. Regarding the context of teletandem in particular, the online sessions themselves are not moderated by an expert-teacher either. However, mediation sessions (Salomão, 2012; Andreu-Funo, 2015; Leone & Telles, 2016), that is, moments that happen after the online sessions (Leone & Telles, 2016), can be a way of promoting moments of further reflection (Lopes & Freschi, 2016).

This qualitative research⁵ aims at discussing how pedagogical mediation can contribute to the co-construction of interculturality within the thematic project TTB (Telles & Vassallo, 2006; Telles, 2011, 2015a). To achieve this objective, the following research question was raised: how can pedagogical mediation contribute to the co-construction of interculturality?

This text is divided into five sections. Section 1 concentrated on the objective as well as on a brief contextualization of this research, while in section 2 I deal with the relevant literature to ground this study. In section 3, I address the method used and, in section 4, I present the data analysis and discussion. Finally, in section 5 final considerations are made and some suggestions for further research are offered.

2. Review of Literature

For Belz (2007), telecollaboration can be characterized as ethnographic, dialogic and critical. Ethnographic because learners can observe, analyze and interpret the behavior of their online partners. Dialogic in the sense that learners’ utterances arise out of interaction with others. Finally, critical since “learners are not passive receptacles of received knowledge (i.e. a facts-and-figures approach to culture learning), but rather active participants in a dynamic process of knowledge construction” (Belz, 2007:138).

In teletandem, the specific “mode of telecollaboration” (Telles, 2015a:604) in my study, it is also possible to promote interaction and dialogue between language learners from different cultures. Indeed, telecollaboration is regarded by other researchers as an opportunity for intercultural dialogue. For instance, Helm (2016:153) states that through dialogue and by working collaboratively “participants explore identities and difference, personal experience and emotions, which contribute to awareness of self and others”. O’Dowd (2003:133), in turn, asserts that “on-line discussions allow learners to express their ideas and then to clarify and redefine them through feedback and through the other perspectives to which they are exposed”. In addition, similar to O’Dowd (2003), Tella and Mononen-Aaltonen (1998:14) feel that the intercultural dialogue through telecollaborative activities allows for “interaction between self and other and the incorporation of the latter’s conceptual horizon to one’s own perspective”.

Telecollaborative interactions nonetheless do not guarantee an in-depth intercultural understanding (Kern, 2000; Belz, 2002; Kramsch & Thorne, 2002; Thorne, 2006; Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013; Lopes & Freschi, 2016; O’Dowd, 2013; Telles, 2015b). Along the same lines, Liddicoat and Scarino (2013:111) highlight that “exposure to interaction of itself does not necessarily equate with intercultural learning” and Thorne (2006:8) stresses that “tandem learning may have significant limitations” when it comes to enabling students to “constructively engage in intercultural communication”. With regard to the context of teletandem specifically, the mediation sessions, as explained previously, can favor moments of deeper reflection (Lopes & Freschi, 2016).

For Salomão (2012), the mediation session in teletandem is an opportunity for the narration of experiences by those who experienced them, that is, the participants themselves. In line with the author, it can be said that both the latter and the teacher-mediator can compare ideas, share views, confront opinions, raise questions, and so on. Leone and Telles (2016:244), in their turn, define mediation sessions as follows:

Moments that follow interactions in teletandem. During these sessions, students have the opportunity to dialogue and exchange experiences with a mediator - a teacher of foreign languages. These discussions focus on (a) aspects of language, (b) culture and (c) partners’ relationship. The mediation activity aims at giving students a teacher supported context (scaffolding⁶) to reflect on the teaching and the learning experiences during the teletandem session.

With respect to telecollaborative interactions in the teletandem context, it could be argued that gaining knowledge of other people’s values and behaviors, respect for other cultures, adaptation to different contexts, openness to other viewpoints and personal desire to know other cultures are relevant aspects when it comes to the construction of interculturality, which Byram (1997) actually names intercultural communicative competence. For him, this term refers to the ability to use language in interactions with people from other cultures. Byram (1997:53) adds that for the development of such a competence it is paramount that language learners “elicit from an interlocutor the concepts and values of documents and events”.

The author proposes five components (or what he names savoirs) for the development of intercultural communicative competence, namely: (1) attitudes, which is related to a “willingness to suspend belief in one’s own meanings and behaviors, and to analyze them from the viewpoint of the others with whom one is engaging” (1997:34); (2) knowledge, referring to knowledge of other cultures and the self in social interactions; (3) skills of interpreting and relating, that is, “the ability to acquire new knowledge of a culture and cultural practices and the ability to operate knowledge, attitudes and skills under the constraints of real-time communication and interaction” (1997:61); (4) skills of discovering and interacting, meaning that it is necessary to have the ability to interpret a document or event of another culture and relate it to her/his own culture; and (5) critical cultural awareness, which stands for the examination and interpretation of cultural differences.

As stated by Byram (1997), in relation to interaction among people from different cultures, an intercultural speaker is the one who has the ability to be a negotiator and mediator of different viewpoints, a vital aspect for the development of intercultural communicative competence. In this regard, Müller-Hartmann and Kurek (2016:132) argue that the intercultural speaker “mediates and builds relationships between two interlocutors involved in interaction”.

Kramsch (1993) explains that meaning-makings are an interpersonal process, since they emerge through interaction with “the other”. This way, the reflection between “the self” and “the other” in intercultural interaction presupposes the deconstruction of fixed representations as well as of the world itself. Kramsch (2005:553) adds that such a reflection can lead to interculturality, which is related to “an awareness and a respect of [sic] difference, as well as the socio-affective capacity to see oneself through the eyes of others”. In the same vein, Bredella (2002:39) states that interculturality is the ability to “reconstruct the context of the foreign, take the others’ perspective and see things through their eyes. This implies that we are able to distance ourselves from our own categories, values and interests”. Byram, Gribkova and Starkey (2002:29) emphasize that such a decentering attitude can help language learners “to step outside their taken for granted perspectives”.

In 1993, Kramsch coined the term the third place. She defined it as a hybrid space where a constant mediation between different cultures occurs, which can help language learners to decenter themselves from cultural representations. From this perspective, Filho and Gil (2016:1517) makes clear that “by assuming that interculturality depends on a dialogical interaction, it is possible to re-affirm that ‘third places’ are never constructed by a single person, but they are co-constructed through the interaction among students and teachers”. For Kramsch (2011:354-355), the third place refers to:

A sphere of interculturality that enables language students to take an insider’s view as well as an outsider’s view on both their first and second cultures. It is this ability to find/establish/adopt this third place that is at the very core of intercultural competence.

The third place can be associated with two metaphors: discursive faultlines (Kramsch, 1993; Menard-Warwick, 2009) and transgredience (Kramsch, 2013). For Kramsch (1993), discursive faultlines concern the moments in which cultural representations are contested at the third place. As explained by Menard-Warwick (2009:30), these discursive faultlines, that is, “areas of cultural difference”, are “pedagogically valuable because they index the cultural areas that need to be explored in order to work toward interculturality”. The second metaphor, transgredience (Kramsch, 2013:62), stands for

The ability of speakers to see themselves from the outside […]. Through transgredience, language learners learn not only to use the language correctly and appropriately, but to reflect on their experience. They occupy a position where they see themselves both from the inside and from the outside - what I have called a “third place”.

In more recent studies, Kramsch (e.g. 2006, 2009, 2011) has been reconceptualizing her own concept of the third place. For her, it is necessary to recognize a symbolic dimension⁷ that pervades the process of meaning-making in interaction, as it helps in understanding others. For Kramsch (2009), the meaning of symbolic is linked “not only to representations of people and objects in the world but to the construction of perceptions, attitudes, beliefs, aspirations, and values through the use of symbolic forms” (p. 7). Thus, instead of the third place, Kramsch (2006, 2009, 2011) proposes the term symbolic competence. Kramsch (2011:359) makes clear that this term is related to “the capacity to recognize the historical context of utterances and their intertextualities, to question established categories”. For Kramsch and Whiteside (2008:664), symbolic competence refers to “the ability not only to approximate or appropriate to oneself someone else’s language, but to shape the very context in which the language is learned and used”. The need to recognize a symbolic dimension in online interactions specifically had already been emphasized by O’Dowd (2006:86) in the following way:

Apart from knowledge of the target culture and attitudes of openness toward and interest in other cultures, effective intercultural interaction includes the skills of being able to discover and understand the symbolic [emphasis added] meaning that is attributed to behaviors in different cultures. It also involves an awareness that one’s own way of seeing the world is not natural or normal, but culturally determined.

In sum, it could be claimed that teacher-mediators in telecollaborative exchanges can help students in the process of distancing from “their preexisting assumptions and practices” (Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013:26), where “the borders between self and other are explored, problematized and redrawn” (Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013:42). Similarly, O’Dowd and Eberbach (2004), Ware and Kramsch (2005), Thorne (2006), Rocha and Lima (2009), Telles (2015b) and Lopes and Freschi (2016) argue that teacher-mediation is a way to promote moments of reflection. As Liddicoat and Scarino (2013:116) put it, the distancing process from one’s cultural assumptions makes it possible “to see the unfamiliarity of the cultural representations” as well as the “transformational engagement of the learner in the act of learning” (2013:42).

3. Method

The data used in this study⁸ were collected⁹ in a specific telecollaborative project, TTB (Telles & Vassallo, 2006; Telles, 2015a, 2015b), referred to in section 1, between September and December 2016. During that period, the author was a teacher-mediator at TTB and collected data for his doctoral research¹⁰.

This qualitative research, since it involved a specific partnership, as will be explained below, can be considered as a case study (Duff, 2014), because it looked at a contemporary phenomenon in its real context. For Duff (2014:233), case studies “are normally studied in depth in order to provide an understanding of individuals’ experiences, issues, insights, developmental pathways, or performance within a particular linguistic, social, or educational context”.

Thus, precisely because it is a case study, this research included two participants in particular: Vinícius and Any^{11 12}. They were part of a teletandem partnership between a state university in Brazil, where TTB is developed, and a university in the United States. Vinícius, a Brazilian citizen, was 21 years old at the time of the data collection and was a learner of English. Any, a U.S. citizen, was 19 years old and was a learner of Portuguese.

The excerpts analyzed below were taken from (a) 1 out of 10 teletandem sessions; (b) 1 out of 8 mediation sessions; (c) 1 out of 9 experience reports and; (d) 2 out of 12 interviews. The teletandem sessions between Vinícius and Any were video-recorded through the application Zoom. In the mediation sessions, which occurred soon after the teletandem sessions, Vinícius, other participants of the Brazilian university and the teacher-mediator were able to discuss different aspects related to the online sessions. Through the experience reports via Google Forms¹³, Vinicius had the opportunity to collect his thoughts and submit personal impressions concerning his weekly partnership with Any. He also participated in interviews, through which I could better understand what he had addressed in his experience reports. Both the interviews and the mediation sessions were audio-recorded.

In order to facilitate and optimize the transcription process, I used Transana¹⁴. The data from the videos and audios were not fully transcribed, but only the parts deemed to be relevant for analysis (Erickson & Shultz, 1981). I translated the excerpts from Portuguese into English, upon which I take full responsibility. I made the English translation of such excerpts available as footnotes.

Regarding the excerpts, I used “V” referring to Vinícius, “A” to Any, “M” to Marza, “Y” to Yasmin¹⁵ and “R” to the researcher. The information between two parentheses, that is, (( )), as transcription conventions¹⁶, are related to the researcher’s comments.

4. Data Analysis and discussion

Bearing in mind that the objective of this study is to discuss how pedagogical mediation can contribute to the co-construction of interculturality within the thematic project TTB, in what follows the data analysis and discussion will be presented.

The excerpt below, taken from the fourth teletandem session, demonstrates how Vinícius expressed an interest in knowing Any’s position on the following topic: homo-affective union and child adoption by same-sex couples.

((Vinícius and Any are talking in Portuguese at this moment))

1. V: A respeito do casamento gay você é contra ou você é a favor?

2. A: Favor.

3. V: Favor... e adotar criança?

4. A: Como assim adotar?

5. V: Esse... esse... esse casal gay adotar uma criança o que você acha?

6. A: Aham... claro a hundred per ce* cem por cento... eu amaria se os meus pais fossem... um casal gay.

7. V: Oi?

8. A: Eu conheço muito [sic] casais gay que são muito gente boa... trata... mas assim... o jeito que eu fui criada... eu tenho família eu tenho pessoas da minha família super conservador [sic] que não gosta [sic]... mas... aqui na faculdade eu tenho muito amigo gay.

9. V: Entendi.

10. A: Onde eu morava tem muito [sic] casais gay [sic] que eles são tipo são pais marviloso [sic].

((At this point, Vinícius was asked to start speaking in English))

11. V: Ah in English for now.

12. A: English? OK.

13. V: Yes.

14. A: What about you, what’s your opinion on that?

15. V: My opinion? ah... como que fala eu sou a favor? How can I say?

16. A: I’m… I am… in favor.

17. V: I am in favor but in... have a children [sic] not... my opinion.

18. A: Ah, OK!

19. V: Yes because...

20. A: Do you think so… getting married… yes and then…

21. V: Yes.

22. A: Having kids no…

23. V: No yes.

24. A: OK, OK... why… why?

25. V: Because when the… children... go to school it’s… everyone joke [sic] with the children.

26. A: Uh-huh. (Excerpt 1 / teletandem session / original in Portuguese¹⁷from turn (1) to (10); original in English from turn (11) to (26) / Vinícius and Any / 26-10-2016)

On the question whether Any was for or against child adoption by same-sex couple in turns (3) and (5), she replied in turn (6) that she fully agreed with it. In turn (14), Any wanted to know Vinícius’s perspective and in turn (17) he said that he was in favor of homo-affective union, but he did not agree with child adoption by same-sex couples. In turn (24), Any was interested in knowing why her partner had such an unfavorable opinion, and in turn (25) he explained that it was due to bad jokes that children encounter in schools, an opinion Any seemed to agree with in turn (26). It can be seen that Vinícius, in turn (1), was able to elicit information from his partner (Byram, 1997), in the same manner as Any could ask his partner’s opinion in turns (14) and (24). Hence, through this dialogue, Vinícius had a chance to know his partner’s perspectives on this topic. In this regard, Byram (1997) states that it is of paramount importance to discuss different cultural subjects, such as traditions, behaviors, institutions and cultural products, from the perspective of the “other”.

In the next excerpt, taken from the fourth mediation session, it can be seen how Vinícius highlighted his concern with children:

1. V: Como que a criança vai crescer numa escola? e os amiguinhos sabendo que o... é pai com pai mãe com mãe e etc.? aí eu disse que nisso eu não sou a favor [...].

2. R: E mas Vinícius só uma curiosidade você disse que você não é a favor... mas somente por esse motivo ou há mais algum?

3. V: Não assim eu sou a favor do casamento gay normal de boa eu sei respeitar.

4. R: Mas quanto à adoção de filhos por um casal do mesmo sexo?

5. V: Porque... não sou sabe o por quê Rodrigo? porque ta ele chega numa universidade por exemplo se for menina até VAI assim só que sabe? mais ou menos assim? agora um moleque por exemplo... sabe? aquele negó* “ah fica quieto” “o seu pai é... é gay que não sei o quê” então eu acho que mexe com o psicológico da criança mexe com o biopsicossocial dela... entendeu? (Excerpt 2 / mediation session / original in Portuguese¹⁸/ 26-10-2016)

In turns (2) and (4), I asked Vinícius whether there were any other reasons for his argument against child adoption by same-sex couples. In turn (5), he expressed his concern over the fact that these children may be discriminated against in society, and the tone of his voice appeared to convey his disapproval. Soon after in that mediation session, as a way of providing further reflection, I asked all of the participants if they had any opinion on this topic. The following excerpt shows how Marza was critical of Vinícius’s view:

1. M: Eu acho que Vinícius está certo em partes porém ele ta errado em outras porque... esse casal gay ele tem... ele quer ele quer esse afeto de um filho... entendeu?

2. V: É.

3. M: Então mexe com as duas partes sim ((psychological and biopsychosocial)) a criança vai sofrer muito... porém ela... pode ter certeza que se esses pais lutaram tanto pra ter ela eles vão dar muito amor.. e tem muitas crianças com filho... filhos de pais héteros que não têm esse amor que... esses pais homossexuais podem dar... a educação também pode ser muito boa... preparar o psicológico do filho... “olha filho... é... na sua escola é meio diferente porém... nós vamos te dar muito amor”... preparar a cabeça da criança...

[…]

4. M: porque aí... pensa assim o seguinte... se a base é boa... não vai cair tão fácil então não vai ser qualquer papinho que vai derrubar a criança. (Excerpt 3 / mediation session / original in Portuguese¹⁹/ 26-10-2016)

It is evident how in these discursive faultlines (Kramsch, 1993; Menard-Warwick, 2009) Vinícius’s comments clashed with Marza’s view. At the same time, this piece of interaction made room for Marza, by positioning herself at the third place (Kramsch, 1993, 2011), to offer a different perspective (Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013) on the topic. Moreover, through her thought-out explanation, she was helping him to “make the strange familiar and the familiar strange” (Byram, Gribkova & Starkey, 2002:19) or, in a similar way, “to see the unfamiliarity” of his “cultural representations” (Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013:116).

After Vinícius said that each person has her/his own opinion on that topic, I remarked that the opinions were somewhat different amongst the participants. The following excerpt depicts how this participant’s principles seem to have collided with Yasmin’s, who also positioned in that mediation session:

1. R: Será que tudo isso que você está... é... relatando e que nós estamos discutindo aqui... não pode ser... tão somente uma construção social?

2. V: Também!

((Yasmim asked for permission to speak))

3. Y Eu concordo em partes com a... Marza.

4. R: Marza.

5. Y: Marza disse com o que você ((looking at the teacher-mediator)) ta falando... eu acho que é importante... a visão... da criança do homem e da mulher mas eu acho que não é essencial eu acho que o mais importante o mais essencial é o amor.

6. V: É.

7. Y: Então se o casal homossexual der o amor à criança isso que importa... e em relação a isso que você falou ((looking at Vinícius)) de se preocupar com as piadinhas... é em relação ao homossexuais um homossexual por te abraçar ou um preto ou... o filho... esse filho desse casal homossexual as piadinhas na escola a gente se preocupar com isso a gente não ta também... fazendo com que esse preconceito continue?

8. V: Continue exatamente!

9. Y: Porque essa preocupação com isso... a preocupação do que o que outros vão pensar... significa que eu também to pensando naquilo. (Excerpt 4 / mediation session / original in Portuguese²⁰/ 26-10-2016)

In turn (1), I asked everyone in the group, but also addressing Vinícius, about whether it was “possible to claim” that the issue under discussion was the outcome of a social construction. In this sense, my questioning in turn (1) was intentionally raised to bring Vinícius to perceive that his “way of seeing the world is not natural or normal” (O’Dowd, 2006:86), but actually Yasmin was the one who followed up on that moment of reflection in turns (5) and (7). It could be said that in these two turns, but also in turn (9), she took on the position of a “teacher-mediator”, since she also provided the group with further reflection. This way, she was acting as an intercultural speaker (Byram, 1997; Müller-Hartmann & Kurek, 2016), for she showed her ability to be a negotiator and mediator of different viewpoints at that moment.

Still in turn (7), Yasmin revealed her critical approach when she suggested that Vinícius’s concern with “bad jokes” in schools could reinforce existing prejudice, and in turn (8) Vinícius seemed to agree with her positioning. In the latter’s remark in turn (9), it may be implied that Vinícius, just as “the others who are prejudiced”, is prejudiced. Also in turn (9), Yasmin having taken on the voice²¹ (Blommaert, 2005) of “I” instead of “you” shows her skill of interaction (Byram, 1997), bearing in mind that the use of the pronoun “you” could have produced a face-threatening act²² (Brown & Levinson, 1987).

In Excerpt 4, it could be considered that Yasmin was developing symbolic competence (Kramsch, 2006, 2009, 2011; Kramsch & Whiteside, 2008) since, by contributing with alternative perspectives (Byram, Gribkova & Starkey, 2002; Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013), she was attempting to “shape the very context” (Kramsch & Whiteside, 2008:664). Moreover, she acted according to what Kramsch (2013) names transgredience, that is, she brought about a space in which Vinícius, her classmates and the teacher-mediator could see themselves both from the inside and the outside.

A few days after that mediation session, Vinícius’s vision on child adoption by same-sex couples was put forward again. The next excerpt, taken from this participant’s fourth experience report, demonstrates how he voiced this topic:

Eu falei para ela ((Any, in the teletandem session)) que eu também não era contra o casamento Gay mais que eu era e sou contra a adoção por esses tipos de casais, falei para ela como a criança vai crescer na escola com o machismo que existe hoje em dia nas escola, nas ruas, em fim em todo lugar, eu disse para ela que é uma coisa que mexe com o Piscológico da criança. (Excerpt 5 / Vinícius’s experience report / original in Portuguese²³/ 03-11-2016)

This excerpt depicts how his position contrary to child adoption by same-sex couples continued. What seems to be noteworthy is that he showed empathy toward children and concern about prejudice, as it had been the case in Excerpts (1) and (2). Also in this experience report, he claimed that he had liked the mediation session (Excerpts 3 and 4) because he could get to know different viewpoints (Byram, Gribkova & Starkey, 2002; Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013). Nearly two weeks after this experience report (Excerpt 5), Vinícius’s opinion, as can be seen in the next excerpt taken from the sixth interview, was also favorable regarding the mediation session:

1. V: Foi um assunto muito interessante que teve debate ((banging his fist on the palm of his left hand)) na na... sala entendeu? aquele dia eu achei que ia até MORRER.

2. R: Na sessão de mediação aquele dia?

3. V: Isso isso isso foi muito legal gostei. (Excerpt 6 / semi-structured Interview / original in Portuguese²⁴/ 17-11-2016)

In turn (1), Vinícius highlighted the opportunity to steer debate during the mediation session. He even stressed what he was saying by making gestures, not to mention that the tone in his voice was tinged with excitement. In this turn, when he underlined that “aquele dia eu achei que ia até morrer / that day I thought I was even going to die”, illustrates how he had felt when he experienced his classmates’ counter-arguments. Quite possibly, Vinícius put into use the figurative language resource “to die” with reference to when Marza and Yasmin (Excerpts 3 and 4, respectively) had brought forward their own perspectives, which may suggest that he had felt uncomfortable in the face of those clash of ideas. In turn (2), I attempted to get more details about this, but in turn (3) Vinícius only said that he had liked the discussion in that mediation session. The following excerpt from that interview portrays when Vinícius recalled Marza’s discourse in the mediation session (Excerpt 3):

1. V: Aí foi que nem a Marza falou que... eu achei muito legal o que ela falou também que é pra vida quando...

[...]

2. V: “Vinícius, mas pensa o seguinte comigo... quando... o alicerce é forte a estrutura não cai fácil” beleza... só que se a estrutura não... e se a estrutura cair?... como vai cair? (Excerpt 7 / semi-structured interview / original in Portuguese²⁵/ 17-11-2016)

In turn (1), Vinícius revealed the significance that Marza’s comment (Excerpt 3) had had for him when he said “é pra vida / it’s for life”, which could be a sign that the co-construction of interculturality was taking place. That is to say, in the mediation session (Excerpt 3 and Excerpt 4) he had had the opportunity to get to know other points of view regarding the topic in question. Hence, it could be argued that such an opportunity helped Vinícius to decenter (Kramsch, 1993, 2005, 2011; Byram, 1997; Bredella, 2002; Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013), albeit very timidly, from his cultural representations and, at the same time, to display an openness to other viewpoints (Byram, 1997). Furthermore, it might be claimed that the mediation session (Excerpts 2, 3 and 4) enabled him to foster his skill of interaction and discovery (Byram, 1997) with his classmates, who had different opinions from his.

It can be seen that Vinícius had the chance to discuss with Any the topic about homo-affective union and child adoption by same-sex couples in the teletandem session (Excerpt 1). However, the mere exchange of views did not prove to be sufficient to at least promote initial steps of decentering, or, in line with Kramsch (2013), to develop transgredience. Otherwise said, Vinícius’s viewpoints were not problematized in the teletandem session, which prevented him from seeing the same topic through multiple perspectives. In this connection, Telles (2015b:1) warns that teletandem sessions “may fall into shallow performances of sedimented and pre-given representations of self and other”. In addition, Lopes and Freschi (2016) remind us that in teletandem sessions the two partners do not generally question each other’s comments.

Telecollaborative interactions cannot be moderated by the teacher, as was explained previously (Helm, 2016). Yet in the case of the mediation session, as a teacher-mediator, I could occupy a position “in-between” my participants, and, at the same time, I acted as the one who fostered moments of in-depth reflection upon stereotyped cultural representations. Indeed, as already observed, a possible way to promote moments of reflection is through the teacher-mediation’s help (O’Dowd & Eberbach, 2004; Ware & Kramsch, 2005; Thorne, 2006; Rocha & Lima, 2009; Telles, 2015b; Lopes & Freschi, 2016). Similarly, Lopes and Freschi (2016) and Telles (2015b) argue that it is necessary to go deeper into cultural essentialisms in the mediation sessions. Hence, in order to fight against some cultural representations, I engaged my participants in dialogue where they had the opportunity not only to talk about different aspects related to their online exchanges, but also to reflect about them. About this, Ware and Kramsch (2005:203) posit that:

As students explore the nature of language and communication across cultures through their technology-mediated interactions, teachers will be pivotal in helping them take […] an intercultural stance. They can help their students develop a decentered perspective that goes beyond comprehending the surface meaning of words to discovering the logic of their interlocutors’ utterances.

Actually, it may be argued that the nature of the discussions in the mediation sessions converges with the idea that through dialogue it is possible to unveil cultural assumptions and further discuss them (Helm, 2016). In this way, the data analysis indicated that through the mediation session, but also in the interview, it was possible to expand upon the topic about homo-affective union and child adoption by same-sex couples, which favored further reflection. As a result, Vinícius was able to develop “an intercultural stance”, as suggested by the authors’ quote above. In other terms, by means of dialogue in the mediation session (Excerpts 2, 3 and 4), both Marza, Yasmin and the teacher-mediator - and not only the teacher-mediator, therefore - paved the way in the “The Zone of Proximal Development”²⁶ (Vygotsky, 1978) for moments of reflection on implicit and explicit cultural values (Byram, 1997) underlying Vinícius’s arguments. Through this “intercultural bridge” that we had offered to him, this participant’s cultural representations could be contested at the third place (Kramsch, 1993, 2011).

As was seen earlier, the interpersonal process to understand otherness at the third place is essential for the co-construction of interculturality (Kramsch, 1993, 2011; Filho & Gil, 2016). In this sense, due to the possibility of getting to know different viewpoints in these discursive faultlines (Kramsch, 1993; Menard-Warwick, 2009), it could be argued that a possible transformational engagement of Vinícius (Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013), which could be observed in a more concrete way in the interview (Excerpt 7), seemed to be occurring. In keeping with Liddicoat and Scarino (2013), this possible transformational engagement was accomplished through exploring, problematizing and redrawing the borders between the self (Vinícius) and the other (Marza, Yasmin and the teacher-mediator).

As noted above, it would only be in the interview (particularly in Excerpt 7) that there appeared to be a more concrete sign that the co-construction of interculturality was taking place. This was possible because, by recalling what Marza had explained in the mediation session (Excerpt 3), mainly that what she had said “é pra vida / it’s for life”, it seems that he displayed openness to get to know other viewpoints (Byram, 1997), which could also be showing that a process of decentering (Kramsch, 1993, 2005, 2011; Byram, 1997; Bredella, 2002; Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013), albeit very timidly, was in progress. Such a display of openness had also been observed in Vinícius’s fourth experience report, written eight days after the mediation session (Excerpts 2, 3 and 4), in which he stated that owing to his participation in the mediation session he had come across different perspectives:

O que mais gostei dessa interação foi que o assunto teve uma grande percussão no momento de mediação ((in the mediation session)) em sala de aula entre os alunos, uma coisa que pude perceber varias visões ambos olhares. (Excerpt 8 / Vinícius’s experience report / original in Portuguese²⁷/ 03-11-2016)

Interestingly, in the second-to-last interview of the semester, I invited Vinícius to give his opinion on his participation in the teletandem sessions and in the mediation sessions. Referring to the mediation sessions but also to the process as a whole, he stressed that he had acquired knowledge and experience opportunities for his life. In the next excerpt, taken from the eleventh interview, this participant underlined, among other things, that he had started to take account of the need to avoid oversimplified views:

Me cresceu [sic] bastante... psicossocialmente... espiritualmente tudo sabe? me fez ver mais a vida... como ela é de verdade cê entendeu? é... a não generalização [...] e não era essa a visão que eu tinha sabe? (Excerpt 9 / semi-structured interview / original in Portuguese²⁸/ 07-12-2016)

This excerpt shows that Vinícius had a favorable view about his experience in the teletandem activities in general. Additionally, his discourse may suggest that such an experience helped him to promote a growing awareness of cultural differences, which could be a sign that a possible transformational engagement (Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013) was taking place.

Despite the fact that the interviews are not part of the pedagogical context of teletandem and have been rather useful for me as a research instrument, they proved to be moments for individual dialogue with Vinícius. Indeed, interview could be understood here more as “individual conversations” than as a methodological instrument, as arranging an individual conversation with the interactant / participant is a possible pedagogical intervention that teachers can resort to in different situations. Furthermore, interviews could be related to mediation sessions, since the latter, as Funo (2015) puts it, can occur between the teacher-mediator and one participant, and not only in group. From this perspective, I considered the interviews as a sort of “mediation session”.

It should be noted that at no point did I, in the mediation session and the interview, and Marza and Yasmin, in the mediation session, suggested that Vinícius’s visions were “wrong” or “right”, especially because he had the right to maintain his opinions or not as well as to agree or not with our viewpoints. This finds resonance in the following assertion by Belz (2007:152): “becoming an intercultural speaker does not mean agreeing with your partner’s point of view or convincing your partner of the validity of your own point of view”. Instead, Marza, Yasmin and I were aiming at making him see his cultural representations from other perspectives (Byram, Gribkova & Starkey, 2002; Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013), for instance, when Marza and Yasmin explained to him in the mediation session (Excerpts 3 and 4) that children can receive affection and love from same-sex parents.

5. Final remarks

As explained previously, in order to achieve the objective of this study, that is, to discuss how pedagogical mediation can contribute to the co-construction of interculturality within the thematic project TTB, the following research question was raised: how can pedagogical mediation contribute to the co-construction of interculturality?

It should be noted that, differently from some contexts of teaching and learning languages in which the content is previously established, merely transmitted as factual information or serve as “an excuse for using language” (Gil, 2016:341), the topic about homo-affective union and child adoption by same-sex couples addressed in the teletandem session emerged spontaneously, on the basis of the participants’ experiences and also “under the constraints of real-time communication and interaction” (Byram, 1997:61).

Despite this, the outcomes of this research showed that Vinícius, in the teletandem session, did not have the opportunity to decenter from his cultural representations. The results revealed however that opportunities for at least initial steps of a decentering attitude (Kramsch, 1993; Byram, 1997; Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013) and, in some cases, signs of a possible transformational engagement of this participant (Liddicoat & Scarino, 2013), would come about due to the teacher-mediator’s and Vinícius’s classmates’ help in the mediation session. In other words, the discussion that happened in the discursive faultlines (Kramsch, 1993; Menard-Warwick, 2009) during the mediation session played a part in the process of the co-construction of interculturality.

The application of different research techniques, mainly the experience reports and the interviews, helped me understand my data more deeply. Additionally, the use of different methodological procedures (e.g. the teletandem sessions and the mediation sessions) allowed me to “read between the lines” the participants’ utterances as well as to interpret different “voices” (Blommaert, 2005) in their discourses. Therefore, I suggest that future research should also include methodological resources, such as the ones I used but also others where necessary, to better understand how pedagogical mediation can contribute to the co-construction of interculturality in the teletandem context.

In my study, I collected the data over a university semester, making it difficult to determine the extent to which the learning that Vinícius accomplished was applicable in other situations. For example, it is difficult to know whether this participant indeed avoided generalizations, as he had explained in the interview (Excerpt 9), with other partners in following semesters. Evidently, this was not in the scope of my investigation. What I really want to point out is that longitudinal research in teletandem could help to understand how pedagogical mediation can contribute to the co-construction of interculturality over a longer period of time, for instance, two semesters. O’Dowd (2016:284) also reinforces this need. For him, research in telecollaboration “has not attempted to evaluate the impact of virtual contact and exchange on learners over a period any longer than one university semester”.

Although this research focused on a specific project of telecollaboration, TTB (Telles & Vassallo, 2006; Telles, 2011, 2015a), I suggest that the opportunity to investigate how pedagogical mediation can contribute to the co-construction of interculturality is also possible in other projects. Two examples could be The Cultnet Intercultural Citizenship (Byram, 2016) and The Cultura Exchange Programme (Furstenberg, 2016), described in section 1, where telecollaborative activities are also accompanied by an expert-teacher.

In conclusion, given the results of this study, I contend that there is clearly a demonstrable need for the teacher-mediator to be willing to deal with intercultural issues in mediation sessions, in addition to being fully committed to the process of deconstructing cultural essentialisms. About this, Telles (2015b:24) cautions that “if the teacher is not critically well informed about such issues, the mediation session may not transcend the level of mere reports of experience, in turn perpetuating stereotypes and sedimented conceptions of self and other”. In order to favor a critical approach regarding the learners’ fixed cultural representations, teacher-mediators can highlight “complexity and ambiguity” (Kramsch, 2011:364) as well as what is underlying the participants’ viewpoints, that is, “what remains unsaid” (Kramsch, 2011:364). With this in mind, teacher-mediators can encourage discussions that go beyond superficial representations.

Acknowledgments

I would like to express my profound gratitude to my advisor, Dr. Gloria Gil, for having helped me to carry out my PhD research, and Dr. João Antonio Telles, who kindly opened the doors of the teletandem laboratory for the development of my investigation.

References

• ANDREU-FUNO, Ludmila Belotti. 2015. Teletandem: um estudo sobre identidades culturais e sessões de mediação da aprendizagem Tese de Doutorado. UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Estudos Linguísticos.
• BELZ, Julie Anne. A. 2002. Social dimensions of telecollaborative foreign language study. Language Learning & Technology, 6(1), 60-81.
• BELZ, Julie Anne. 2007. The development of intercultural communicative competence in telecollaborative partnerships. In: O’Dowd, Robert (ed.). Online Intercultural Exchange: an Introduction for foreign language teachers (127-166). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
• BLOMMAERT, Jan. 2005. Discourse: Key topics in sociolinguistics Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• BRAMMERTS, Helmut. 1996. Tandem language learning via the internet and the International E-Mail Tandem Network. In: Little, David; Brammerts, Helmut. (Eds.). A guide to language learning in tandem via the Internet (9-22). Dublin, Centre for Language and Communication Studies.
• BREDELLA, Christian Lothar. 2002. For a flexible model of intercultural understanding. In: Alred, Geof; Byram, Michael; Fleming, Mike. (Eds.). Intercultural Experience and Education (31-49). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
• BROWN, Penelope; LEVINSON, Stephen. 1987. Politeness: Some universals in language usage Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• BYRAM, Michael. 1997. Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence Clevedon: Multilíngual Matters.
• BYRAM, Michael. 2016. The Cultnet Intercultural Citizenship Project. In: O’Dowd, Robert; Lewis, Tim. (Eds.). Online Intercultural Exchange: Policy, Pedagogy, Practice (256-262). New York: Outledge.
• BYRAM, Michael; GRIBKOVA, Bella; STARKEY, Hugh. 2002. Developing the intercultural dimension in language teaching: a practical introduction for teachers Strasbourg: Council of Europe.
• DUFF, Patricia. 2014. Case study research on language learning and use. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 34, 233-255.
• ERICKSON, Frederick; SHULTZ, Jeffrey. 1981. When is a context? Some issues and methods in the analysis of social competence. In: Green, Judith Lee; Wallat, Cynthia. (Eds.). Ethnography and language in educational settings Norwood: Ablex.
• FILHO, Jeová Araújo Rosa; GIL, Gloria. 2016. Research into practice: Planning intercultural moments in the additional language classroom. Domínio de Linguagem, 10(4), 1499-1519.
• FURSTENBERG, Gilberte. 2016. The Cultura Exchange Programme. In: O’Dowd, Robert; Lewis, Tim. (Eds.). Online Intercultural Exchange: Policy, Pedagogy, Practice (248-255). New York: Outledge.
• GIL, Gloria. 2016. Third places and the interactive construction of interculturality in the English as foreign/additional language classroom. Acta Scientiarum - Language and Culture, 38(4), 337-346.
• HELM, Francesca. 2016. Facilitated dialogue in Online Intercultural Exchange. In: O’Dowd, Robert; Lewis, Tim. (Eds.). Online Intercultural Exchange: Policy, Pedagogy, Practice (150-172). New York: Outledge.
• KERN, Richard. 2000. Literacy and Language Teaching Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• KRAMSCH, Claire. 1993. Context and culture in language teaching Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• KRAMSCH, Claire. 2005. Post 9/11: Foreign languages between knowledge and power. Applied Linguistics, 26(4), 545-567.
• KRAMSCH, Claire. 2006. From communicative competence to symbolic competence. The Modern Language Journal, 90(2), 249-252.
• KRAMSCH, Claire. 2009. The multilingual subject Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• KRAMSCH, Claire. 2011. The symbolic dimensions of the intercultural. Language Teaching, 44(3), 354-367.
• KRAMSCH, Claire. 2013. Culture in foreign language teaching. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 1(1), 57-78.
• KRAMSCH, Claire; STEFFENSEN, Sune Vork. 2008. Ecological perspectives on second language acquisition and socialization. In: Duff, Patricia; Nancy Hornberger. (Eds.). Encyclopedia of Language and Education (17-28). Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media.
• KRAMSCH, Claire; THORNE, Steven. 2002. Foreign language learning as global communicative practice. In: Block, David; Cameron, Deborah. (Eds.). Globalization and language teaching (83-100). London: Routledge.
• KRAMSCH, Claire; WHITESIDE, A. 2008. Language ecology in multilingual settings: Towards a theory of symbolic competence. Applied Linguistics, 29(4), 645-671.
• LEONE, Paola; TELLES, João Antonio. 2016. The teletandem network. In: O’Dowd, Robert; Lewis, Tim. (Eds.). Online Intercultural Exchange: Policy, Pedagogy, Practice (241-247). New York: Routledge.
• LIDDICOAT, Anthony; SCARINO, Angela. 2013. Intercultural language teaching and learning Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
• LOPES, Queila Barbosa; FRESCHI, Ana Carolina. 2016. Potenciais sequências de aprendizagem intercultural no teletandem: a importância da mediação. Revista do Gel, 13(3), 49-74.
• MARCUSCHI, Luiz Antônio. 1986. Análise da conversação São Paulo: Ática.
• MENARD-WARWICK, Julia. 2009. Co-constructing representations of culture in ESL and EFL classrooms: discursive faultlines in Chile and Colombia. The Modern Language Journal, 9(1), 30-45.
• MÜLLER-HARTMANN, Andreas; KUREK, Malgorzata. 2016. Virtual group formation and the process of task design in Online Intercultural Exchanges. In: O’Dowd, Robert; Lewis, Tim. (Eds.). Online Intercultural Exchange: Policy, Pedagogy, Practice (131-149). New York: Outledge.
• O’DOWD, Robert. 2003. Understanding “the other side”: Intercultural learning in a Spanish-English e-mail exchange. Language Learning & Technology, 7(2), 118-144.
• O’DOWD, Robert. 2006. The use of videoconferencing and e-mail as mediators of intercultural student ethnography. In: Belz, Julie Anne; Thorne, Steven. (Eds.). Internet-mediated Intercultural Foreign Language Education (86-120). Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
• O’DOWD, Robert. 2013. Telecollaboration and CALL. In: Thomas, Michael; Reinders, Hayo; Warschauer, Mark. (Eds.). Contemporary Computer-assisted Language Learning (123-141). London: Bloomsbury Academic.
• O’DOWD, Robert. 2016. Learning from the past and looking to the future of Online Intercultural Exchange. In: O’Dowd, Robert; Lewis, Tim. (Eds.). Online Intercultural Exchange: Policy, Pedagogy, Practice (273-294). New York: Outledge.
• O’DOWD, Robert; EBERBACH, Katrin. 2004. Guides on the side? Tasks and challenges for teachers in telecollaborative projects. ReCALL, 16(1), 5-19.
• PATTON, Michael Quinn. 1985. Quality in qualitative research: Methodological principles and recent developments Chicago: Invited address to Division Journal of the American Educational Research Association.
• ROCHA, Celso Fernando; LIMA, Thereza Cristina de Souza. 2009. In: Telles, João Antônio (Org.), Teletandem: Um Contexto Virtual, Autônomo e Colaborativo para a Aprendizagem de Línguas Estrangeiras no Século XX (231-241). Campinas: Pontes.
• SALOMÃO, Ana Cristina Biondo. 2012. A cultura e o ensino de língua estrangeira: Perspectivas para a formação continuada no projeto Teletandem Brasil Tese de Doutorado. UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Estudos Linguísticos.
• SCHAEFER, Rodrigo. 2019. The co-construction of interculturality in the project teletandem brasil: foreign languages for all Tese de Doutorado. UFSC - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Inglês.
• SCHAEFER, Rodrigo; LUNA, José Marcelo Freitas. 2018. Negociação de assuntos interculturais em espaços telecolaborativos. Entretextos, Londrina, 18(2), 121-141.
• SOUZA, Micheli Gomes. 2016. Teletandem e mal-entendidos na comunicação intercultural online em língua estrangeira Tese de Doutorado. UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Estudos Linguísticos.
• TELLA, Seppo; MONONEN-AALTONEN, Marja. 1998. Developing dialogic communication culture in media education: Integrating dialogism and technology Helsinki: Media Education Publications 7.
• TELLES, João Antonio. 2009. Do we really need a webcam? - The uses that foreign language students make out of webcam images during teletandem sessions. Letras & Letras, 25(2), 65-79.
• TELLES, João Antonio. 2011. Teletandem: Tranculturalidade nas interações on-line em línguas estrangeiras por webcam Research Project: Universidade Estadual Paulista, Brazil (1-24).
• TELLES, João Antonio. 2015a. Learning foreign languages in teletandem: Resources and strategies. DELTA - Revista de Estudos em Linguística Teórica e Aplicada, 31(3), 603-632.
• TELLES, João Antonio. 2015b. Teletandem and performativity. Revista Brasileira de Linguística Aplicada, 15(1), 1-30.
• TELLES, João Antonio; VASSALLO, M. L. 2006. Foreign language learning in-tandem: Teletandem as an alternative proposal in CALLT. The ESPecialist, 27(2), 189-212.
• THORNE, Steven. 2006. Pedagogical and praxiological lessons from Internet-mediated Intercultural Foreign Language Education Research. In: Belz, Julie Anne; Thorne, Steven. (eds.). Internet-mediated Intercultural Foreign Language Education (2-30). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
• VASSALLO, Maria Luisa. 2009. Teletandem ou tandem tele-presencial? In: Telles, João Antonio (Org.), Teletandem: Um Contexto Virtual, Autônomo e Colaborativo para a Aprendizagem de Línguas Estrangeiras no Século XX I (185-197). Campinas: Pontes.
• VASSALLO, Maria Luisa; TELLES, João Antonio. 2006. Foreign language learning in-tandem: theoretical principles and research perspectives. The ESPecialist, 27(1), 83-118.
• VYGOTSKY, Lev Semyonovich. 1978. Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• WARE, Paige; KRAMSCH, Claire. 2005. Toward an intercultural stance: Teaching German and English through telecollaboration. The Modern Language Journal, 89(2), 190-205.
• WOOD, David; BRUNER, Jerome; ROSS, Gail. 1976. The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Child Psychiatry, 17, 89-100.
• ZAKIR, Maisa de Alcântara. 2015. Cultura e(m) telecolaboração: Uma análise de parcerias de teletandem institucional Tese de Doutorado. UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista. Programa de Pós-Graduação em Estudos Linguísticos.

• 1
  See http://www.teletandembrasil.org/ for further information on TTB.
• 2
  Skype is a software that provides voice and video communications via the Internet.
• 3
  Zoom combines online meeting, video conferencing and mobile collaboration. It also provides cloud-based video communication.
• 4
  “Interactant” is the name given to the two partners who are learning each other’s language in teletandem sessions.
• 5
  For Patton (1985:1), a qualitative research presupposes “an effort to understand situations in their uniqueness as part of a particular context and the interactions there”.
• 6
  For Wood, Bruner and Ross (1976:90), “scaffolding” is a support mechanism that “enables a child or novice to solve a task or achieve a goal that would be beyond his unassisted efforts”.
• 7
  Actually, in 1993, Kramsch already pointed out the existence of a symbolic dimension permeating the dialectical interaction between language and culture. Also, Kramsch and Steffensen (2008:20) explain that in the 1990s sociolinguistics already agreed that “a language is not just a mode of communication but a symbolic statement of social and cultural identity”.
• 8
  The data are from a research project duly approved by Research Ethics Committee of Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (Comitê de Ética em Pesquisa com Seres Humanos - CEPSH-UFSC) with the Approval Number 1.762.956. CAAE: 56955216.8.0000.0121.
• 9
  I am grateful to TTB coordinators, teachers and researchers for having allowed me to collect data for my PhD research.
• 10
  The data used in this study are therefore from Schaefer’s (2019) investigation, which aimed at understanding how the co-construction of interculturality took place within TTB.
• 11
  Fictitious names in order to safeguard the participants’ identity.
• 12
  For ethical issues, a consent form (Free and Informed Consent Term) was signed by all the participants in this study.
• 13
  On Google Forms, it is possible to create virtual forms, e.g. open-ended, multiple choice and evaluation questions.
• 14
  See http://www.transana.org/ for further information on transana program.
• 15
  Marza and Yasmin were Vinícius’s classmates, who participated in the mediation sessions. Both of them were Brazilian and English learners at the time.
• 16
  I used the transcription criteria proposed by Marcuschi (2006). Researchers in teletandem, such as Zakir (2015) and Souza (2016), transcribed their research data based on Marcuschi’s (2006) transcription proposal, with adaptations. Due to specificities of my data, I decided, on the basis of the criteria proposed by the author, to create my own transcription criteria.
• 17
  My translation: “1. V: About gay marriage are you against or are you in favor? 2. A: In favor. 3. V: In favor... and adopting a child? 4. A: How come adopting? 5. V: This... this... this gay couple adopting a child what do you think? 6. A: Uh-huh... of course a hundred per cent... I would like very much if my parents were... a gay couple. 7. V: What? 8. A: I know a lot of gay couples who are very nice people... they treat... but like... the way I was raised... I have a family there are very conservative people in my family who don’t like it… but... I have a lot of gay friends here at the university. 9. V: I got it. 10. A: Where I used to live there are many gay couples who are like wonderful parents.”
• 18
  My translation: “1. V: How is the child going to grow up in a school? and her/his little friends who know that the... it’s father with father mother with mother and etc.? then I said that I’m not in favor [...]. 2. R: And but Vinícius just a curiosity you said you’re not in favor... but only for this reason or is there any other? 3. V: OK like I’m in favor of gay marriage it’s OK I do respect. 4. R: But regarding child adoption by same-sex couples? 5. V: Because... I’m not in favor do you know why Rodrigo? because like he arrives at the university for example if it is a girl it may even be OK but you know? something like this? but a boy for example... you know? that thin* “hey shut up” “your dad is... is gay whatever it may be” so I think there are psychological consequences for the child there are biopsychosocial consequences... did you get it?”
• 19
  My translation: 1. M: I think Vinícius is right in some ways but he’s wrong in others because... this gay couple has... it wants it wants this affection of a child… did you understand? 2. V: Yes. 3. M: Then of course there are consequences ((psychological and biopsychosocial)) the child will suffer a lot... but she/he... you can be sure that if these parents fought so hard to have her/him they will give out lots of tendering love... and there are many children with child... children of heterosexual parents who don’t have this tendering love that... these homosexual parents can give... education can also be very good... to prepare the child’s mind... “hey my son... like... it’s a little different in your school but... but we’re going to give you lots of tendering love”... to prepare the child’s mind... […] 4. M: Because then... think about the following... if the background is god… it doesn’t fall down so easily so the kid won’t be affected negatively by any small talk.”
• 20
  My translation: “1. R: Don’t you think that what you are... like... reporting and what we are discussing here... could be... just a social construction? 2. V: Also! ((Yasmim asked for permission to speak)) 3. Y: I agree in part with... Marza. 4. R: Marza. 5. Y: Marza said regarding what you ((looking at the teacher-mediator)) are saying... I think it’s important... the vision... of the child of the man and of the woman but I think it’s not essential I think the most important the most essential is love. 6. V: Yes. 7. Y: So what matters is whether the homosexual couple gives tendering love to the child... and what you said ((looking at Vinícius)) about worrying about jokes... like about homosexuals a homosexual hugging you or a black person or... the child... the child of this homosexual couple the jokes in school if we worry about this aren’t we also... allowing this prejudice to continue? 8. V: To continue exactly! 9. Y: Because the concern with that… the concern with what the others are going to think... means that I am thinking about that too.”
• 21
  For Blommaert (2005:4), the concept of voice “stands for the way in which people manage to make themselves understood or fail to do so”. For this to be possible, individuals employ in interactions discursive means (e.g. specific pronouns) that are within their reach and according to the specificity of each context.
• 22
  According to Brown and Levinson (1987:65), interaction entails the use of face-threatening acts “that by their nature run contrary to the face wants of the addressee and/or of the speaker”.
• 23
  My translation: “I told her ((Any, in the teletandem session)) that I was not against same-gender marriage but that I was and I am against adoption by these kinds of couples, I told her how will the child grow up in school with the existing sexism in schools these days, in the streets, anyway everywhere? I told her that it’s something that affects the psychological state of the child.”
• 24
  My translation: “1. V: It was a very interesting subject because there was a debate ((banging his fist on the palm of his left hand)) in the in the... classroom did you understand? that day I thought I was even going TO DIE. 2. R: In the mediation session that day? 3. V: Yes yes yes it was very good I liked it.”
• 25
  My translation: “1. V: What Marza said that... I found it very nice what she said too that it’s for life when... [...] 2. V: “Vinícius, but think the following... when… the background is strong the structure doesn’t fall down easily” OK... but what if the structure doesn’t... what if the structure falls down? how will it fall down?”
• 26
  Vygotsky’s (1978:86) concept of The Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) refers to “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”.
• 27
  My translation: “What I liked the most about this interaction was that the topic had great repercussion at the moment of mediation ((in the mediation session)) in the classroom among the students, one thing I could realize several visions both views.”
• 28
  My translation: “I grew a good deal... psychosocially... spiritually everything you know? it made me see life more... how it really is did you understand? like... not to generalize [...] and this was not the vision I had you know?”

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  06 Nov 2020
• Date of issue
  2020

History

• Received
  10 Oct 2019
• Accepted
  02 July 2020