Running head: STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

Students strategies behind dealing with misunderstandings in the classroom:

Are they culturally based?
Kathleen Hamel
Colorado State University

Author Note
Kathleen Hamel, Department of English, Colorado State University.

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

Abstract
Misunderstandings occur in the pedagogical framework on a daily basis; for the purposes of this
paper, misunderstandings will be defined as confusion during the presentation of content. The
focus of this study will be the Q&A session that could possibly precede these misunderstandings
and the discourse that occurs during it. In order to clarify these misinterpretations, students can
often be fraught with the options to clarify these points. This paper seeks to analyze the
strategies, and the various contexts, in which students use to clarify the misunderstandings that
occur in class, and specifically to answer whether these strategies are culturally based.
Keywords: misunderstandings, strategies, culture

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

Students strategies behind dealing with misunderstandings in the classroom:

Are they culturally based?
Literature Review
Throughout the literature, culture and the misunderstandings surrounding cross-cultural
contexts are widely discussed. There are two constructed categories into which these studies fall
into: the breakdown of communication that is due to culture, or a lack of the target language,
therefore misunderstandings occur; and the cultural differences between various communities
and how these differences could lead to misunderstandings as well.
Indicated in Hinnenkamps (2011) article, research was conducted about a case-study
dealing with misunderstandings in communication between a teacher and a student. Through
using a ranking-system based upon how misunderstandings are dealt with, he categorizes
misunderstandings on a seven-point continuum. In discussion of this seven-point continuum, he
notes that the notion of a misunderstanding has a beginning and an end; additionally mentions
that they have a core, which are localized and identified (p. 224). After analyzing this casestudy based upon a misunderstanding between the two participates, the conclusion is made that
a different interpretation of inference that initially led to a misunderstanding may be solved and
clarified by a common repair, even if the misunderstanding is based on interculturality (p. 237).
This led me wondering: is that true? Is a common repair all that is necessary in order to
understand? Can an interlocutor determine the core of a misunderstanding? And then proceed to
easily fix it? These questions are a basis for understanding if strategies that students implement
in order to overcome a misunderstanding are as simple as he is indicating.
Kurtyka (2007) focused their research on how culture and language interact in a
pedagogical framework. Factors that contributed to both were considered, like achieving

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

intercultural competence and the concept of self. For the paper, self is described as
encompassing the cognitive, affective and behavioral variables that are activated in any
interpersonal encounter. The authors implication is that these behaviors of self are culturally
based. The author takes this concept to see if it can be applied to Hoefstedes three stages of
achieving intercultural competence; these are: awareness, students perceiving their own culture
and how others fit into that perception; knowledge, learning the practices of a particular culture;
skills, the implementation of the knowledge and awareness to practice those adopted cultural
norms. It was concluded that if a focus on language and discernible cultural practices at the
beginning stages of learning, then a greater mastery of the culture would be had. And if mastery
were to be in place, then the likelihood of misunderstandings to occur would decrease.
Since no research was conducted, and thus no data collected, it would be interesting to
see exactly how the possibilities of each play out in the ESL context. Will a students learning
style and preferences actually be attributed to culturally specific reasons? Also, throughout a
students time in the US the question remains as to if they will begin to develop intercultural
competence? And can these competencies be identified in the strategies that students adopt?
Within Davies & Bentahilas (2012) article, they discuss the cross-cultural instances between the
Anglo-Arab cultures and how each party fails to reach intercultural competence. They note that
in the literature, various generalizations about the Arab culture specifically are often stereotyped,
from a conversation analysis point-of-view. Some stereotyping that occurs is within the patterns
they display in order to save face, and how these tendencies along with the term, Arab, are
oversimplified and inaccurate. However, for the particular examples they provide where
misunderstandings occur between the two, these raised some questions from a researchers
stance. For instance, they address an example within the pedagogical context, the latter [Arab

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

students] will often not ask for clarification if they do not understand, and will be ways of
displaying their own weaknesses in front of their colleagues; for this reason, he says, they may
participate better if placed in a class of strangers (Davies & Bentahila, 2012, p. 236). After
reading this article and this quote especially, I was curious as to whether or not this would be the
case with the Arab student I would interview.
This research about Arab culture is relevant since this study is targeting students with that
L2, in addition to students with a L2 of Chinese. So now its time to turn to a study specifically
aimed at Chinese students and their teachers, in an EFL context, which highlights differences in
both participants perception of the other. Xiao (2007) compared learners preferences and
teachers perceived notion of what students favorite activities and learning preferences are. Xiao
(2007) ended up concluding that only 41% of teachers were able to perceive their learners
preferences. This means that a discrepancy lays between what teachers think is going on and the
reality.
In the concluding remarks it is noted that, it is too early to say whether these results
would hold trueoutside China (Xiao, 2007, p. 181). This leaves me to wonder if similar
results would hold true in the US. Questions that have stemmed from that study include: If
students do not speak up about their preferences in their home country, would they be more
likely to in another? This notion could transfer to their inability to express the need for
clarification. From the teacher perspective: Do teachers need to receive input from the students
so that they are not solely relying on their intuition, which could perhaps be wrong? All of these
points must be taken into account in order to gain insight as to what needs to happen so that the
teacher and student are on the same level of understanding.

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

Despite the fact that Xiao (2007) was unable to determine if teachers perceptions could
be accounted for in the US, other research has been conducted by Huang, Dotterwich, & Bowers
(2012). Their research on the other hand deals with the cultural reasons behind
miscommunication between ESOL students and teachers. It is first indicated how culture and
language are intertwined because [culture] encompasses the way a language is structured and
used (Huang, Dotterwich & Bowers, 2012, p. 36). They go on describing how these two go onto
formulate intercultural communication, which is communication that preserves the nature of
social relationships. These relationships include verbal and nonverbal cues that are customary
in the respective culture. And when two cultures engage in discourse, since different social
assumptions are preset, this provides opportunities for communication breakdown.
They note that the breakdown is due to either the student or the teacher. In order for
English Language Learners (ELLs) to not be sought as the cause of the misunderstanding (as
they are often attributed to), they cannot speak in order to save face, and not feel
embarrassment in front of their American student counterparts. Some remarks about this study,
in regards to the present one, are: Do only ELLs use the strategy of possible not speaking in
order to not feel embarrassed? Could it be possible that American students use this same
strategy? Or is this only due to differing cultures? I would make the assumption that all students
can feel this way, and its not simply a cultural matter.
Gumperz and Cook-Gumperz (2012) expanded more on the thought of
misunderstandings but focused in on how discourse itself, what people say, the way they talk,
and how in its essence cultural differences lie. The authors were seeming to challenge how
culture was simply beliefs and norms that were shared amongst a community but ...how human
action depends on a variety of interactionally established cultural practices; they noted that in

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

order ...to discover how these practices can be located in action through pursuing ethnographic
investigations that relate to specific communicative situations (p. 66). Although not strictly an
ethnographic study, it follows the idea that Gumperz and Cook-Gumperz propose which is: are
tendencies in the classroom to clarify misunderstandings cultural? Since these actions are
interactionally practiced, possibly differently in various cultures, then its worth further
investigation.
In some of the research presented above, most come to the agreement that a generalized
acceptance exists among some scholars that interlocutors within a dialogue will not overcome
the misunderstandings that occur due to cultural differences; although they note that this
generalization is not one to be held as the standard. In addition to this, some note how
intercultural communication can be fixed through the use of better linguistic tools. However,
Shi-xu (2006) wants to challenge these thoughts, saying, Culturally exclusive norms and
standards cannot be applied to the analysis of the conduct of intercultural communication (p.
320). His reasons behind this attest to the fact that since we live in a global community, from the
technological revolution that is presently occurring, we are far too influenced by other cultures
discourse. He emphasizes that this is primarily influenced in a power-dominated fashion,
implying that one culture dominates the Other.
Although this to a certain extent must be true, our day-to-day lives are far more
consumed by our present daily habits and societal norms, which we live in. Therefore, if Shi-xu
proposes this notion, does this mean that students will have similar coping strategies? Have their
lives been influenced in order to change the ways in which they would ask for clarification?
More likely than not, since the students would be in the ESL environment theyre learning in,

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

theyre have to adopt certain strategies in order to be successful in a new culture. This could
relate back to Hoefstedes steps in becoming interculturally competent.
Present Study
This study seeks to examine cross-cultural strategies that arise from misunderstandings in
a pedagogical framework; more specially, these misunderstandings are then attempted to be
clarified by being queued by direct and indirect questions to-and-from the teacher-student
paradigm. For the purposes of this study, misunderstandings will be defined by a lack of
understanding of the content being taught. Direct and indirect questions will be categorized
according to Celce-Murica and Larsen-Freeman, who say that indirect questions are when the
utterer is typically not asking a question but reporting a real or hypothetical question (1999, p.
692). Typical phrases that introduce indirect questions can include, but are not limited to: Could
you tell me, Would it be possible, or Is there any chance. If questions do not pose some
hypothetical situation, then they will be categorized as direct questions. The nature of these
questions will be considered in the classroom but in other contexts as well, right before or after
class, office hours and various online platforms, ex. E-mail or online.
I hypothesize that there will be different strategies and that these strategies are culturally
based, from a pedagogical perspective. In addition to this, I anticipate that these strategies will be
based upon student and teachers previous educational experiences. These educational
experiences reflect from the society where they were taught and thus their cultural education.
These different aspects can be seen from: when a student asks a question, if they decide to ask
one at all, to the types of questions that they ask and through which mode they choose to seek the
answer. I intend to give EFL teachers ways to apply the results from the study so that strategies
can be implemented based upon the strategies that students use.

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

This study is intended to be the pilot study. Therefore, there will be additional phases.
Since this is so, some aspects of the method reflect that next step in this study.
Method
Participants
For this study, three undergraduate-level students participated. Their majors varied from:
English, Engineering and Accounting. These students were female and ranged from 19-21 years
old, with the mean age being 20 and the standard deviation of one. Each student had a different
L1: English, Arabic and Chinese; the three came from the United States, Libya and China,
respectively.
The Chinese student had had 13 years of English instruction while the Arabic student had
had ten. From speaking with these students, the Chinese student would appear to be an
intermediate-low while the Arabic student would be an advanced-low; these observations were
compared with the standards set by the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages
(2012).

Materials
Based upon my previous experience of observing ESL classrooms, I created the questions
from what was noticed in regards to misunderstandings and the strategies taken to clarify them.
The question sets allowed for a semi-structured method outlined. The semi-structured approach
was taken so that, if needed, clarification and greater explanation could be provided.
The interviews started off with some basic background information on the students, i.e.
age/nationality, etc. and were not included in the totaling of the question types. That being said,
the amount of questions per student differed since clarification was needed more/less dependent

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

10

upon the student. The total number of question sets was 27, 26 and 26 for Chinese, Arabic and
English L1, respectively. These interview questions can be seen in Appendix A.1-A.3.
The questions were aimed at seeking out what strategies students used in the classroom.
Strategy focused questions that included in the interview were nine, ten and nine questions for
Chinese, Arabica and English L1, respectively. In addition to this, questions also revolved
around students asking the teacher for clarification, the types of questions students ask (in/direct)
and why students thought misunderstandings occurred. The types of questions focused
questions accounts for two, three and one questions for those groups, taking account the ordering
from above.
The questions, for the ELLs, looked at two perspectives: in their home country and in the
United States. These perspectives could indicate differences, if any, between the two educational
paradigms. Four and three questions were asked about their home, while six and ten were asked
about their time in the USA, for the Chinese and Arabic student, respectively.
As indicated above, this pilot study is influenced by the second stage. Therefore,
questions were asked to seek if microaggressions occur stemming from these misunderstandings.
Microaggressions are when daily verbal, behavioral and environmental indignities, whether
intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative racial, gender,
sexual orientation, and religious slights and insults to the target person or group (Sue, 2010, p.
5).
Aside from this, the questions also took the perspective of the student but also as an
observer of other classmates. The purpose of this is to provide more evidence, in a way that
students might feel less intimidated to speak of their own situations. The questions from the

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

11

perspective as an observer totaled four, two and four, for the Chinese, Arabic and English L1,
respectively.
Finally, students were asked about their perceived reasoning behind why
misunderstandings occur in a pedagogical framework. These consisted of five questions for
ELLs and six questions for English L1. The questions that specifically dealt with this issue, as
shown in Appendix A.2, by the example of question 23, were not included within the
USA/Home country categories since it could have been referring to either context.
Preceding the set of interview questions, there were four scenario questions that were
administered to each student. These scenarios were based upon students clarification in a variety
of situations: before class, in the middle of class, and as an observer when another student asks
for clarification. There were ten questions that were administered to each student based upon
what happened within each scenario, as seen in Appendix A.4-A.5.
Procedure
For this study, three participants from different L1s were interviewed with a list of
interview questions and four scenarios. Initially an e-mail reaching to three separate English
classes was sent in seeking participants; the three were the ones who sought interest in
participating in the study. These interviews were then administered at the university library.
Here, each interview was conducted on three separate days, with one student per day. Each
interview lasted from 40-60 minutes and consisted of note taking on a laptop computer and the
conversation was audio-recorded via a mobile phone.
Before the interview was conducted, the students were told the reasoning behind this
study. It was stated that the research was to seek if the strategies that students would take to

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

12

clarify misunderstandings, based upon content, were culturally based. In addition to this,
permission was obtained to audio record the interview.
After each interview, the dialogue that was recorded was transcribed. The transcribed
interviews were then coded and analyzed.
Analysis
Upon review of the questions, and the answers that students provided, it appeared that
some questions could not be used for analysis. The main reason behind this is because the
questions do not follow the criteria in this study; the criteria being: strategies that students use,
the types of questions they ask, from the perspective of a student/another student and why
misunderstandings occur. Most of the questions that were not used included instances of possible
microagressions that could be seen in the classroom. However, some were relevant to the study,
like item 15, in Appendix A.2, dealing with instances of hypothetical situations. But since the
scope of the question surrounds what the teacher would do in this circumstance, not the student,
then it is irrelevant. In addition to this, the question makes the presumption that the student
would ask a hypothetical question as a strategy, which is possibly an inaccurate assumption.
That being said, the amount of questions of being of use to this analysis was cut. The final
amounts that were studied were: 18, 17 and 15 questions for Chinese, Arabic and English L1s,
respectively (out of the original 27, 26 and 26).
Students answers were coded much in the same way that the materials were created.
They looked for instances of what country the student was in, if strategies were used and the
general reasons behind misunderstandings. More specific subcategories were included for each.
These subcategories for the strategies that students used are: dont ask/ignore, e-mail,
office/office hours, before/after class, during class or other. Other consisted of instances when

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

13

the student did not disclose the strategy, although there was one alluded to, seeking a resource
not mentioned (ex. classmate or websites) or it was dependent upon the size of the class or the
relationship with classmates/teacher. The subcategories of misunderstandings include: due to
culture, past educational experiences (i.e. when a student has taken another class at the
university), differing personalities of the students or the material that is being covered in class.
Results
The results of the study are that each student uses a variety of strategies, and the
concentrations of use for each also depend upon the student. The results are indicated in Tables
1-3 in Appendix B. For the ELLs in their home countries, the most common forms of strategies
were: not asking (2), during class (3) and before/after class (2), out of nine coded strategies. For
all students when they are in the USA, the most common forms of strategies were: not asking
(6), during class (6) and office hours (12) out of 35 coded strategies. The reasons as to why
misunderstandings occur are: culture (5), previous classes taken (5), material covered in class (2)
and personality differences (1).
The strategies in which students used to clarify misunderstandings varied from studentto-student. Although this is so, it cannot be said that these differences are simply due to culture.
This is due to the small sample size that was used to correct data. There are trends throughout
each student but more research would need to be conducted in order to determine that their
perceptions are ones that hold true for their respective cultures.

Discussion
The trends that were seen from each student most likely were culturally based. In both the
Chinese and Arabic culture, the students indicated that the way the teacher taught did not allow
for questions to be asked during class; this was because the teacher lectured for the majority of

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

14

the class, or went over homework with the students. This can be seen in Graph 1 for the Chinese
student. There appears to be a discrepancy between the two students though based upon the
teaching styles in place. However, the Arabic student indicated that, I was comfortable with my
teachersAnd I do it [raise hand and ask a question] when Im comfortable with the teacher.
Since she was more comfortable with her teachers at home, then she would ask questions more
during class in order for her to not feel embarrassed.
This contradicts Davies & Bentahila (2012) who suggested that Arab students would be
better off if they were in a room full of strangers in order to save face. Although it may be true
that in her home country she felt comfortable to ask questions, but in the US it was much more
unlikely. Both the Chinese and Arabic students indicated why they choose not to answer
questions during class. They said that since they assume other people in the class have different
experiences, or possibly better English, they want to save face and ignore it. As Hinnenkamp
(2001) indicates, students know when the misunderstanding may have been noticed but
remained unnegotiated (p 219). As a language learner, this defense mechanism is useful so
that you dont come off as unintelligible but this will not provide students with the understanding
they need.
Even the American student noted some instances of not wanting to feel embarrassed. She
said that students might not continue to ask questions, even if there is a Q&A session going on
revolving around a misunderstanding based upon content, because they would want to save
face. Because if a student continues to not understand, then they could be perceived as stupid or
annoying and dont want to continue asking questions about the topic.
This means that Huang, Dotterwich, & Bowers study (2012) can be applied to most
student experiences, not solely the ESOL students; that students dont want to interact so

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

15

continued miscommunication doesnt persist. There is a difference, however, for the American
students. It would appear as though the English L1 student would seek other means of getting
their question answered. While the ELLs said that since they dont necessarily know what
couldve been said (since the teacher was talking fast or content was confusing), they just ignore
it because maybe it isnt that important.
It is probable that this reasoning behind this strategy is actually of equal importance to
the cultural aspect. No matter what a students culture is, they all can feel embarrassment in the
classroom. In addition to this, most students know when it might not be the most appropriate
time to raise their hand in a 100 person lecture, as the American and Arabic student indicated,
thus utilizing other strategies. This aspect of the study was indicated within the other category
in the results. It seemed as though when they were comfortable in the smaller classrooms, like
when the Arabic student was more comfortable with her teacher, they were also more
comfortable with her classmates; this allowed her to not feel judged when asking a question.
It seems as though this instances feed into the reasons as to why students thought
misunderstandings would occur in the first place. The top two reasons, as shown in Graph 4,
were previous classes taken and culture. In each respective culture, the way in which students
view teachers are different and therefore the ways in which they clarify could be based upon this.
Also, the ways that teachers handle their classrooms is another possible indicator; whether that is
teachers they have had in their home country or in the United States. Despite the fact that these
two causes were equivalent in their instances, its not completely clear if the two can be
interrelated. Often in students responses, they would not indicate that these previous classes
were in the US or not. If not, this means that it could possibly be culturally derived, more
investigation into these details would need to be conducted. Davies and Bentahila (2012) wrap

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

16

up these points well: Individual interactions...may be influenced by...whether the participants

are perceived as equals or not, and the extent of their previous experience of dealing with
members of the other group (p. 242).
Going off of their last point of previous experience of dealing with members of the other
group, these experiences can change the way that students deal with misunderstandings in the
classroom. Although the Chinese student favored not asking questions in the US, there was a
dramatic increase for seeking out clarification compared to classes in China. Shi-xu points this
out by saying, Cultural practices in education for example are changing, hybridising and reinventing themselves in relation and interaction with the broader cultural context (p. 316). This
means that in order for the student to succeed in a new culture, new practices need to be adopted
for success. Davies and Bentahila (2012), again summarize this point nicely:
It cannot automatically be assumed that participants in an intercultural exchange maintain the
communication patterns they habitually use with their compatriots...does not allow us to
conclude that they will use the same strategies when talking to Americans; they may well adapt
their behavior in the light of what they know about or feel towards their interlocutors (p. 242).
If students did intend to mimic American strategies, then they would need to adopt a more
direct and independent approach. Direct, here, means to indicate that they sought the answers
from the teacher more often times than not, whether in-class, e-mail or office hours. The
students biggest reason as to why she would ask a question in class is because: Theyll [the
teacher] answer questions and become concerned whether or not [all] students understand, so
they push that onto the entire class. So the student asks when she thinks other students might
have the same question, and the teacher jumps on board with that assumption. The Arabic and
Chinese student also noted these same tendencies in classes in the US, that clarification will

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

17

occur in class when there is a perceived notion that the majority of the class is confused;
however, she still considers the questions that she asks in class to be mostly dependent upon
other factors, as previously indicated.
One final point in regards to the causes of misunderstandings. Although there was only
one recorded instance within the questions analyzed of misunderstandings due to individual
personalities, there was more indicated throughout the interviews, especially when talking with
the Arabic and American students. They noted that although culture makes a difference, one
more true to the reasons of misunderstandings is the way an individual receives input. The
American student put it well:
Everyone is different, and so we all come from different backgrounds:
educationally culturally And so I think since were all so different, students
can learn a lot differently too. So, thats definitely the base of a lot of
misunderstanding, just people absorbing information differently.
Despite the fact that each student provided similar, yet different, insight, these results cannot
make a generalization about the types of strategies used and students cultural background. In
order to be able to make conclusive results, more data would need to be administered. Like Hall
(2013) remarked, the job of achieving understanding and insight into other people's mental
processes is much more difficult (p. 173). Therefore, the results that are provided are deemed
inconclusive, although they provide possible insight into this topic. That misunderstanding could
not only be due to culture, but also the kinds of classes and students learning preferences. That
being said, some of the factors that were compared against one another, like culture vs. previous
educational backgrounds of the students, blurred the line between culture and something else. So
in order to get insight, more people are needed to participate in the study.

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

18

Next Phases
This study was created for the purposes of having multiple phases, with this being the
pilot phase. This study is intended to survey ten students from each L1 (English, Arabic and
Chinese), i.e. thirty students total. The procedure for the second phase would include:
observations of classes, interviews with teachers in addition to questioning and interviewing
students (a two-step process in and of itself).
Each L1 group (ten students) will be provided with a questionnaire, at separate times, with
their respective L1 group. The groups will be given the questionnaire simultaneously in a
designated meeting area, ex. the library. After each groups answers have been analyzed, and
coded, then one student from each L1 would be randomly selected to be interviewed, mimicking
the pilot study; however the one difference would be that the scenario questions would be
provided to all thirty participants in addition to the questionnaire, not only the three interviewed
students.
From there, the students who were interviewed, I will go into their English class to
observe the behaviors that they discussed for one week. The teachers that would be observed
would also be interviewed following the observations. The purpose of this is to see if tea chers
perceptions differ than those of their students, much like Xiao (2007). An additional aspect that
teachers provide is if they tend to provide methods of improving a students intercultural
competence as Kurtyka (2007) discussed. This would allow the results to be triangulated and
thus giving a clearer picture into this topic.
Limitations
Although this study has provided valuable insight as to the factors that contribute to
students reasoning behind asking questions, there were some limitations to this study. First, the

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

19

population size was truly too small to make any concrete answers as to if culture plays a larger
roles in students strategies. As previously discussed, the next phases to this study will include a
larger population, so that the results could create a more accurate picture of students reasoning.
The supplementation of participants could allow for a clearer picture as to the educational
cultural paradigms that possibly exist as well.
In addition to this, the population size consisted only of females. This is a limitation since
men and women could offer different perspectives as to what contributes to clarifying
misunderstandings. Through observations of previous ESL courses, males and females have
different approaches throughout class activities. Meaning that the reasons why and how they
handle misunderstandings, males could show insight into something about clarification that was
not attainable with solely females.
The third limitation was language. There are a few aspects that need to be touched base
within the scope of language. The first is the ELLs had no opportunity to indicate their
perceived proficiency in English. Along with this, no concrete evidence to what their tested
proficiency was collected either, such as their TOEFL score. Only the amount of schooling they
had and my intuition would indicate their proficiency levels, which cannot be completely
accurate. Also, since the Chinese student had a lower proficiency level, this could also lead to
incomplete answers. It is possible that a greater explanation could have been provided, thus a
more detailed outlook, if the student had a higher proficiency. That being said, I think it is
important to extract results from varying levels because at each level students might have
different experiences with their teachers. So, it wouldve also been beneficial if an intermediateadvanced student provided input.

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

20

Not only would it have been important to seek a more proficiency levels but ELLs who
had different educational experiences as well. Both the Arabic and Chinese student said that they
came straight to the United States from graduating from high school. It would have been good
insight if some ELLs had attended university in their respective countries; in order to compare
the way university faculty handled misunderstandings and clarification in and outside of the
classroom.
Another way that input could have been improved would be to revise the set of questions.
The ways for this to be done are: adapting questions from another study, narrowing the scope of
the questions provided and/or creating more specific questions about culture. After analyzing the
data, it was fairly apparent that not enough questions focused on the scope at hand; ten questions
has the focus as teachers reactions to students misunderstandings which not the focus of this
current research. The ratio between the question types (strategies, causes of misunderstandings,
direct vs. indirect questions, and from varying perspectives) was not even, not allowing a view of
these factors clearly. And since the interview questions have been influenced by the proceeding
phase, seven questions alluded to possible attitudinal changes, specifically microagressions, from
the teacher.
Also, the questions were not broad enough; they were too focused on seeking a specific
answer, which can be perceived as eliciting restricted results. Like in Appendix A.2, question 15
makes the assumption that the student asks hypothetical questions as a coping mechanism but it
had not yet been established with the student that this was acceptable. These options could
provide researchers with a better understanding of exactly the relationship between the strategies
and culture.

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

21

Even though having a semi-structured interview allowed for questions to be easily

clarified and provided students with a conversation, it did have a downfall. The amounts of
questions were different per student, and not only the amount but also the exact questions
themselves. Although follow-up questions tended to fit within its respective question set,
sometimes it would not be alike enough to fit within that set. This means that the results could
not be compared to precisely. That being said, the semi-structure did permit planned follow-up
questions had to be changed on the spot in order to cater to that student's prior response. This can
be seen in Appendix A.4, specifically on the last scenario, question 5, when the Arabic student
replied that, Yea, so I will never raise my hand and ask a question. Therefore the following
question which initially read, When you do decide to raise your hand..., had to reflect the
students answer and be changed to Say you do decide to raise your hand... This permitted
asking a similar question rather than not asking the question at all.
Finally, since this study asked students about the perceptions of their teachers during
these question-and-answer sessions, it would have provided a more well-rounded perspective if
ESL teachers were questioned also. This could have provided teachers insights as to why they
think students ask questions in class, and if their perspective differs from that of the students. In
the scope of the project, this aspect will be included within the next phase of the study, as
previously mentioned. Then these kinds of questions will be answered.
Pedagogical Implications
The pedagogical implications will vary dependent upon the teacher-in-questions style of
teaching. However, the advice I give for ESL teachers, specifically, is to be clear to the students
when and how you want them to seek clarification. Setting classroom standards can then create a
classroom culture, one that can be different than a student's own. It is possible for students to

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

22

adapt to new standards but, sometimes, new standards need to be explicitly laid out; this enable
minimal confusion about what should be done in those circumstances. The classroom culture will
vary from class-to-class and could be dependent upon the size. If the class were smaller, one
strategy that the student could implement would be to ask clarifying questions to the students.
These could be centered on tricky material, or topics that the teacher knows that students will
have difficulty with. That way the ignore option may never come to fruition.
Conclusion
The basis for this study can be accurately described by Gumperz & Cook- Gumperz
(2012) ...the potential for miscommunication as a function of differences is always present, and
more so when taken-for-granted, culturally specific knowledge acquired through early
socialization experiences is a part of differences in discourse conventions (p. 75). These
references to the fact that the way in which we speak, and how we do it, are culturally
influenced. This study seeked to explore if these differences could be seen in the strategies that
ELLs or American English speakers use to repair misunderstandings that occur in the classroom
based off of content. Although the results are inconclusive, since more participants are needed,
they did provide stepping stones for future studies, and ways that it could be executed more
accurately.

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

23

References
ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines. (2012). ACTFL Professional Programs. Retrieved from:
http://www.actfl.org/sites/default/files/pdfs/public/ACTFLProficiencyGuidelines2012_FI
NAL.pdf
Celce-Murcia, M., Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The grammar book. Boston:Heinle
Cengage Learning.
Davies, E., & Bentahila, A. (2012). Anglo--Arab Intercultural Communication. In C.
Paulston, S. Kiesling & E. Rangel, The Handbook of Intercultural Discourse and
Communication (1st ed., pp. 231- 251). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Gumperz, J.J., & Cook-Gumperz, J. (2012). Interactional sociolinguistics: perspectives

on intercultural communication. In C.B. Paulston, S.F. Kisling & E.S. Rangel (Eds.), The
handbook of intercultural discourse and communication (pp. 63- 75). Malden, MA:
Wiley- Blackwell.
Gumperz, J.J., Herasimchuk, E. (1975). The conversational analysis of social meaning:
A study of classroom interaction. In M. Sanches & B. G. Blount (Eds.), Sociocultural
dimensions of language use (pp. 81-115). New York: Academic Press.
Hall, E. T. (2013). The power of hidden differences. In M. J. Bennett (Ed.), Basic
concepts of intercultural communication: Paradigms, principles, & practices (pp. 165184). Boston: Intercultural Press.
Hinnenkamp, V. (2001). Constructing Misunderstanding as a Cultural Event. In A. Di
Luzio, S. Gunthner & F. Orletti, Culture in Communication: Analyses of intercultural
situations (1st ed., pp. 211- 243). Philadelphia: John Benjamins North America.
Huang, J., Dotterwich, E., and Bowers, A. (2012). Intercultural miscommunication:
Impact on ESOL students and implications for ESOL teacher. Journal of
Instructional Psychology, 39 (1). Retrieved from
http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy2.library.colostate.edu:2048/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfview
er?sid=9e8a9e76-af23-4886-906c-ddd74364ab1f%40sessionmgr4002&vid=4&hid=4212
Johnson, E. (1997). Cultural norms affect oral communication in the classroom. New
directions for teaching and learning, 70, pp. 47-52.

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

24

Kurtyka, A. (2007). From language to culture: On the intercultural dimension of

foreign language learning and teaching. In A. Pearson-Evans & A. Leahy (Eds.).
Intercultural spaces: Language, Culture, Identity (pp. 57-72). New York: Peter Lang.
Shi-xu. (2006). Beyond competence: A multiculturalist approach to intercultural
communication. In K. Bhrig & J.D. ten Thije (Eds.), Beyond Misunderstanding:
Linguistic analyses of intercultural communication (p. 313- 330). Philadelphia: John
Benjamins Publishing Company.
Sue, D.W. (2010). Microaggressions in everyday life: Race, gender, and sexual
orientation. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Xiao, L. (2007). A study on perceptual match and mismatch between Chinese EFL
students and their teachers. In A. Pearson-Evans & A. Leahy (Eds.). Intercultural spaces:
Language, Culture, Identity (pp. 169-185). New York: Peter Lang.

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

25

Appendix A
Each student was required to provide age, sex and L1. The following appendixes (A.1-A.5) show
the questions provided for each L1 in addition to the scenario questions provided to all students.
Appendix A.1 : Chinese L1
1. Describe the way that your English classes were in your home country. What were the
ways your teacher taught English? (ie. Did your teacher lecture at you while you took
notes? Or was it more interactive?) How would you describe how your classes were?
2. What are the differences between there and your English class (high school) in the USA?
3. When you didnt understand a teacher in your class in your home country, what would
happen (ie. Would you raise your hand to answer the question immediately? Would you
ask one of your classmates?) Were there any instances where you still had a question
about something, did you ever eventually ask?
4. Were there any instances where you still had a question about something and did you
ever eventually ask about it?
5. Did any of your classmates ask for clarification usually? What would happen? Would
they raise their hand and ask a question?
6. Do your teacher have office hours? Or would you go up to them after class and ask them
casually?
7. If a teacher did answer a students question in class, what was their general reaction?
Were they happy or annoyed if someone asked a question?
8. Think about those same questions. How would they apply to your experiences at your
classes in the US? If you dont understand something thats going on in that class, do you
ask a question during class time?
9. What would you say their general attitude is when youre asking questions in office
hours? (ie. Are they excited to be able to explain something to you? Or are they like you
should know this?)
10. Do you ever use your e-mail to ask your teacher questions? What kinds of questions
would you ask them over e-mail?
11. Do you ever ask questions about your syllabus? (ie. Not understanding a project you have
to do and you need a quick clarifying question)
12. Thinking about the US and when your classmates ask questions, what is your teacher's
reactions? Are they glad they asked questions in class? Or are they annoyed that theyre
stopping class again?
13. So lets say, for example, they explained a topic to you, and you understood it clearly and
someone else didnt. If they ask the teacher a question, does the teacher respond and
explain it in a different way? Or do they say the same things in a slower fashion? Or
maybe provide more examples?
14. So lets say, you ask your teacher a hypothetical question about a grammar structure that
you just learned, for example the future tense, do they typically understand what

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

26

you/classmate? If they dont understand, what do they ask you to do? Would you ask the
question in the same way or would you say it in a different way?
15. Do misunderstandings occur often (twice per class) between the teacher and students?
16. Do misunderstandings generally happen between the teacher and the whole class, or the
teacher and a specific student?
17. So if its the same student, do they suggest to come to office hours? What do they
typically do if a student is not understanding? So they wont clarify then, if they dont
understand?
18. Why do you think they do that [pretend to not understand]? (ie. Because they dont want
to be the person thats not always understanding?) With that kind of student in mind, do
you think they go to their friends or classmates more often? Or do you think they go to
the teachers more often? Or maybe someone else? (ie. tutor or TA)
19. When there are misunderstandings in the classroom, how would you describe your
teachers emotional response to the misunderstanding?
20. If theyre getting frustrated, do you think they continue to try to explain it or do they
give up?
21. If a specific student is having difficulty with a subject (subject topic), and still cannot
understand after the teacher has explained it in a different way (than the first time), the
student becomes visibly emotionally upset to you (hypothetical situation). Do you think
the teacher can gauge that theyre getting upset? Do you think your teacher notices that?
Or does it depend on the teacher?
22. Maybe a teacher the teacher is not reading that the student is getting upset, do they
continue the lesson and ignore it? Or do they keep trying to explain it and possibly make
the student more upset?
23. If the teacher sees the student is getting upset, and does notice, does the teacher try to
defuse the situation? (They try something else to not continue to make the student upset.)
Or do they change the topic?
24. Why do you think misunderstandings occur in the classroom? Have you ever noticed an
instance where a misunderstanding is not because of the language? But maybe because of
something else?
25. Do you think misunderstanding occur in the classroom due to different expectations (that
the teachers and students have) based upon previous classroom experiences? For
example, maybe in China you had HW due and your HW was late, you got 25% off your
grade but maybe here, you forgot it at home and your teacher says its okay, e-mail it to
me later. Those kinds of expectations, do you think those cause misunderstandings to
happen? Different how? Because you have the convenience of being able to communicate
with a teacher more easily?
26. So homework was one example, what about being late to class? Do you notice
differences?

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

27

27. Do you ever go to visit your teachers office hours (if they hold them)? If yes, do you go
there to get something clarified? If yes, how do you ask the teacher about this (directly or
indirectly)?
Appendix A.2: Arabic L1
1. Describe the way that your English classes were in your home country (i.e. what was the
general format?)
2. What are the differences between there and your English class in the USA?
3. When you didnt understand a teacher in your class in your home country, content-wise,
what would happen? (i.e. Would you ask a question? Would you not ask a question?
What would you do if you didnt understand what was going on?)
4. Would you ever raise your hand and ask a question while class is happening?
5. Why do you need to be comfortable with everyone (i.e. teachers and classmates)? What is
the reasoning behind that?
6. If you do decide to ask a question and they clarify it for you and you still didnt
understand, what would you do then? What would happen if after their given
clarification, you still didnt understand?
7. What about in high school?
8. How would your teacher react to you asking for clarification, their general emotional
reaction (happy, frustrated, etc.)?
9. Think about those same questions. How would they apply to your experiences at your
classes in the US?
10. If you didnt understand their answer when provided clarification, what would you do?
11. Would you ask them directly what you dont understand or do you do it more in an
indirect manner (in office hours)? What is your teachers emotional reaction when you
ask them questions?
12. Do you ever use e-mail to ask your teacher questions? What kind of questions would you
ask them via e-mail?
13. What about if you need to seek clarification on something other than content (i.e. specific
requirements on a rubric or the syllabus)?
14. When another student doesnt understand what the teacher is trying to convey and asks
for clarification, what is the teachers response (ie. do they explain it another way, ask the
whole class if they do not understand this topic?)?
15. When you ask hypothetical questions to your teacher, do they typically understand what
youre asking right away? If not, do they ask you to describe it in another way?
16. Do misunderstandings occur often (1-2 times/class) between the teacher and students?
Does the teacher try to fix these misunderstandings? If yes, how so?
17. Do misunderstandings happen more from the student to the teacher or from the teacher to
the student?

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

28

18. Do misunderstandings generally happen between the teacher and the whole class, or the
teacher and a specific student? If it is a specific student, how does the teacher handle
this?
19. If a specific student is having difficulty with a subject, and still cannot understand after
the teacher has explained it in a different way, the student becomes visibly emotionally
upset to you (i.e. because theyre upset that theyre not understanding). Do you think the
teacher can gauge this as well? In the end, do you think the student grasps the concept?
20. If the teacher does, what the teacher do to defuse the situation?
21. In your perception, did the teacher handle the situation the best that they could? If you
disagree, how do you think the teacher shouldve handled it?
22. When they say that, and they dont get back to it [the topic that caused the
misunderstanding], what do you think that student does (i.e. will they still have this
question in their head and theyll try to pursue to get it answered?)? Why do you think
the student does this?
23. Why do you think misunderstandings occur in the classroom?
24. Do you think misunderstandings occur in the classroom due to different expectations
based upon previous classroom experiences?
25. Or different cultural experiences? Why or why not?
26. Do you ever go to visit your teachers office hours (if they hold them)? If yes, do you go
there to get something clarified? If yes, how do you ask the teacher about this (directly or
indirectly)?
Appendix A.3: American English L1
1. Describe the way that your English classes are run, like a typical day (ex. college
composition course).
2. When you didnt understand a teacher, what would happen (ie. what would you do?)?
3. What would happen if after their given clarification, you still didnt understand? What
would you do?
4. Would you do that [seek for clarification] via classmates or websites?
5. When you ask the teacher in class for clarification, how would your teacher react to you
asking for clarification (happy, frustrated, etc.)?
6. Do you ever use e-mail to ask your teacher questions? What kind of questions would you
ask them via e-mail? Can you describe the tone of their e-mail? What is their formality in
response?
7. What are their response like via e-mail? Can you describe their tone? Or what is your
formality in response? What are their responses like via e-mail?
8. Do you think that teachers get back to you in a timely manner?
9. Lets say a student in your class doesnt understand what the teacher is trying to convey
and asks for clarification, what is the teachers response (ie. do they explain it another
way, ask the whole class if they do not understand this topic, try to get everyone
involved?)?

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

29

10. Are they happy that someone asked a question? Are they annoyed that they should've
been paying attention? What is their general emotional reaction?
11. When you ask hypothetical questions to your teacher, do they typically understand what
youre asking right away? If not, do they ask you to describe it in another way?
12. Do misunderstandings occur often (twice per class) between the teacher and students?
Does the teacher try to fix these misunderstandings? If yes, how so?
13. Why do you think that is [they dont give a complete answer]?
14. Do you think they end the discussion because they realize that the teacher is kind of
pressed for time? Or do you think that they dont want to continue asking because theyre
embarrassed?
15. Do you typically think that its the students that are not understanding rather than the
teacher not understanding the student?
16. Do misunderstandings generally happen between the teacher and the whole class, or the
teacher and a specific student? If it is a specific student, which happens reoccurring, how
does the teacher handle this?
17. Do you think that person would actually go to their office hours?
18. What about an English class?
19. When there are misunderstandings in the classroom, how would you describe your
teachers emotional response to the misunderstanding?
20. If a specific student is having difficulty with a subject, and still cannot understand after
the teacher has explained it in a different way, the student becomes visibly emotionally
upset to you (youre noticing this happening in class). Do you think the teacher can gauge
this as well?
21. If your teacher does, in these smaller classes and can read the student, does the teacher try
to defuse the situation? How do you think they try to do that?
22. In the end, do you think the student grasps the concept?
23. Why do you think misunderstandings occur in the classroom?
24. Do you think misunderstandings occur in the classroom due to different expectations
based upon previous classroom experiences (ie. from high school you did something
different than what is allowed in your comp classes)? Or different cultural experiences?
Why or why not?
25. Do you ever go to visit your teachers office hours (if they hold them)? If yes, do you go
there to get something clarified? If yes, how do you ask the teacher about this (directly or
indirectly)?
Appendix A.4: Scenario Questions for ELLs
In your listening and speaking class in the US, youve been discussing how native speakers of
American English often ask, How are you?, as a part of their greeting, even though it may not
be intended to actually ask how a person is. The next day, you try to quickly ask your teacher
about this concept before class starts. You really want your teacher to answer your simple
question then, so that if you dont understand their answer, you can clarify any

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

30

misunderstandings. Instead of answering your question directly, your teacher says that they will
answer it in front of the whole class in a few minutes.
1. How does it make you feel that your teacher decided to answer your question in front of
the whole class?
2. Why do you think they answered the question in front of the class?
3. If you still didnt understand the answer they give, would you continue asking about the
topic then? If not, would you seek to get your question answered at any other time (ie.
office hours, e-mail)?
4. In your home country, if you had a question like this for your teacher, would you ask
them right before class started? If not, when would you ask them or if you ask them at
all? Or if you wouldnt ask them to clarify the topic at all, why not?
Your classmate raises their hand after your teacher finishes talking about the differences
between regular yes/no questions (ex. Have you finished your homework?) and negative yes/no
questions (ex. Havent you finished your homework?). One of the main differences your teacher
mentions is that, you typically know the answer to the question if you ask a yes/no question in its
negative form. Your classmate asks, Would it be possible to not know the answer if youre
asking a negative yes/no question? You can tell that this makes the teacher annoyed, however
they answer the question, repeating the explanation they provided three minutes earlier in a
slightly different way.
1. What is your initial reaction after your classmate asks the question?
2. Do you think that the student didnt understand the way the teacher was explaining
themselves or do you think the student wasnt paying attention or do you think it was
something else?
3. If a student asks a hypothetical question (like the one in the example), what is the
teachers emotional reaction? What does the teacher then do after the question has been
asked? Can you give an example where this has happened before?
During one of your classes, you teacher speaks very quickly and you dont quite catch what they
are saying. You want to ask your teacher what they are talking about but you dont want to
interrupt their lecture.
1. Do you raise your hand and wait for the teacher to call on you?
1. If yes, does your teacher typically answer your question right away or do they
finish their lecture and then answer your question?
When you raise your hand, your teacher decides to wait to answer your question and continues
to lecture for another five minutes. By the end of this time, youre completely lost about what the
teacher was talking about.
1. Do you still ask the same question you initially were going to ask? If no, why not?
2. If you decide to ask your first question, what would your teachers reaction be? Would
they be glad that youre asking a question? Or would they be frustrated since they would
have to re-explain what they just talked about?

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

31

Appendix A.5: Scenario questions for American English L1

In your college composition course, you were confused about the differences between MLA and
APA in-text citations. The next day, you try to quickly ask your teacher about this concept before
class starts. You really want your teacher to answer your simple question then, so that if you
dont understand their answer, you can clarify any misunderstandings. Instead of answering
your question directly, your teacher says that they will answer it in front of the whole class in a
few minutes, when class starts.
1. Why do you think they answered the question in front of the class?
2. If you still didnt understand the answer they give, would you continue asking about the
topic then, while it's being discussed? If not, would you seek to get your question
answered at any other time (ie. office hours, e-mail)?
3. Why would you ask it then?
Your classmate raises their hand after your teacher finishes talking about the differences
between argumentative papers and analytical papers. They ask a hypothetical question about
changing the way you say something in an analytical paper in order to make it fit into an
argumentative paper. You can tell that this makes the teacher annoyed, however they answer the
question, repeating the explanation they provided three minutes earlier in a slightly different
way.
1. What is your initial reaction after your classmate asks the question?
2. Do you think that the student didnt understand the way the teacher was explaining
themselves or do you think the student wasnt paying attention or do you think it was
something else?
3. So then maybe clarifying what they think about what is being discussed?
During one of your classes, you teacher speaks very quickly and you dont quite catch what they
are saying. You want to ask your teacher what they are talking about but you dont want to
interrupt their lecture.
1. Do you raise your hand and wait for the teacher to call on you? If yes, does your teacher
typically answer your question right away or do they finish their lecture and then answer
your question?
2. So you would raise your hand then? Or would you wait until their lecture is done?
When you raise your hand, your teacher decides to wait to answer your question and continues
to lecture for another five minutes. By the end of this time, youre completely lost about what the
teacher was talking about.
1. Do you still ask the same question you initially were going to ask? If no, why not?
2. If you decide to ask your question (i.e. the first question you had), what would your
teachers reaction be? Would they be glad that youre asking a question? Or would they
be frustrated since they would have to re-explain what they just talked about?

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

32

Appendix B
For Tables 1-3, C = Chinese L1, A = Arabic L1, and E= English L1.
Table B1
Strategies

C A Total

Dont Ask

During Class

After/before class

E-mail

Office (Hours)

Other (classmate/online/undisclosed/dependent)

This table represents the strategies that the ELLs utilized in their home countries.
Table B2
Strategies- students

C A

E Total

Dont Ask

During Class

After/before class

E-mail

Office (Hours)

12

Other (classmate/online/undisclosed/dependent)

This table represents the strategies that all students used in the United States.

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

33

Table B3
Causes of Misunderstandings

C A E Total

Cultural (language, educational institutions, etc.)

Material

Previous classes taken

Personality differences

This table represents the reasons why students thought misunderstandings occurred in the
classroom.

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

34

Appendix C
Graph C1.

This graph displays students strategies in handling misunderstandings in their home country.
The other includes: online help, asking classmates, dependent upon the class or undisclosed.
The students L2 is English.

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

35

Graph C2.

This graph displays students strategies in handling misunderstandings in the USA. The other
includes: online help, asking classmates, dependent upon the class or undisclosed.

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

36

Graph C3.

This graph displays the totals of students strategies in handling misunderstandings in their
home country (L2 speakers of English) compared to strategies that all students use in the USA.
The other includes: online help, asking classmates, dependent upon the class or undisclosed.

STUDENTS STRATEGIES FOR MISUNDERSTANDINGS

37

Graph C4.

This graph displays students perceptions on what causes misunderstandings in the classroom.