This blog series, which explores the differences between the field of intercultural learning from the field of international relations, has established key differences between the two subjects. Among them are the contrasting top-down/bottom-up approaches of each, the place of culture in each field, and the separate focuses of the two subjects. Another area where ICL is very different from international relations is the emphasis on fostering interpersonal relationships across cultures.
Sylvia Cowan, program director for the Intercultural Relations Program at Lesley University in the United States briefly explains this emphasis that contributes to the uniqueness of ICL in the short video clip:
This emphasis on interpersonal relationships is a defining characteristic of intercultural learning. The field of international relations doesn’t emphasize connection at such a personal level but rather emphasizes formal relationships between governments and sometimes organizations. It often makes headlines when prominent individuals within the field of international relations form connections with each other on an intercultural, personal level simply because this is a relatively uncommon phenomena in the field.
Interaction on the interpersonal level has a different place in ICL then in IR.
For example, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and International Monetary Fund Chief Christine Lagarde have formed a personal friendship that is uncharacteristic of two major figures in the field of international relations. Ordinarily, the exchanges between officials are limited to state positions on issues and adhering to international protocols. It is not as common for a more personal relationship to develop.
This is not the case in the field of intercultural learning. Cultural understanding is the major focus of the field, and one cannot truly understand a culture without forming personal bonds with members of the culture. Due to this goal, personal relationships are not only hugely helpful, but they are also many times essential for a genuine intercultural learning experience.
AFS programs themselves are a powerful example of the field’s hands-on and personal nature. Students travel to a new culture and form personal bonds right from the start of their journey. An organization dedicated to international relations would not be so focused on developing interpersonal relationships. Instead, the organization would concentrate on the formal exchanges among governments or groups, not individuals. An example of an organization focused on international relations is the Eurasia Group, a company that consults and advises international actors.
Indeed, the AFS motto, “Connecting Lives, Sharing Cultures,” expresses
An example of an international organization focused on IR is the Eurasia Group (AFS is an international organization focused on ICL)
the importance of interpersonal relationships when striving for cultural understanding. Since AFS is committed to this practice, intercultural learning forms a key part of the organization’s identity and is one major characteristic that sets it apart from others.
By the way, AFS International interviewed Christine Lagarde, an AFS Returnee, back in 2008 for an issue of the AFS Janus magazine and she discussed the importance of AFS Intercultural Programs. Click here to have a look.
Paul Edinger is a strategic operations intern for the Intercultural Learning department at AFS International, where he works to facilitate the implementation of ICL strategy throughout the AFS Network. His time at AFS began in April of 2011 with the Development and Branding department and he continues in 2012 as an intern for ICL. Prior to joining AFS he taught English, Spanish and computer literacy courses to Guatemalan and Salvadoran immigrants to the United States while obtaining his B.A. in International Studies with a concentration in Latin America. He completed minors in Anthropology, Political Science, Latino Studies, and Spanish Language Studies.