How to understand, respect, and communicate effectively across cultural differences — recognising that culture shapes how we see the world, and that the ability to work across difference is one of the most important skills for life, work, and citizenship. Designed for low-cost classrooms where cultural diversity is often already present in the room.
Intercultural competence at Early Years level is about building two foundations simultaneously: a secure sense of one's own cultural identity, and genuine curiosity about the cultural identities of others. Research consistently shows that children who have a strong and positive sense of their own identity are better equipped to engage with difference — insecurity about one's own culture tends to produce defensiveness rather than openness. In many developing-world classrooms, cultural diversity is already present — different ethnic groups, languages, religions, and traditions may all exist within a single class. This is a resource, not a challenge. The most powerful teaching in this area happens through genuine sharing of real experience, not through hypothetical examples of distant cultures. Be aware that in some contexts, cultural differences within a community carry histories of conflict, discrimination, or inequality. Handle these with great care. The goal is to build positive curiosity and respect — not to force premature reconciliation or to minimise real injustice. Never ask a child to represent their entire culture or explain the practices of their community to others. This places an unfair burden on children from minority groups. Instead, invite sharing as personal experience: this is what my family does — not this is what all people from my group do.
Any drawing of a genuine cultural practice — a celebration, a food, a greeting, a family ritual — with a completion that names a genuine reason for its significance and a genuine reason for wanting to share it. The goal is for children to feel that their own culture is interesting and worth sharing, not something to hide or be embarrassed about.
Celebrate all genuine cultural sharing equally. Be alert to children who are reluctant to share — this may indicate shame or past experience of having their culture mocked. Create safety before and during this task. The second completion — why I want others to know — is particularly valuable for building the bridge between pride and sharing.
Three questions that are open, genuine, and focused on understanding — not on judging or pointing out difference as strange. Examples: What is your favourite celebration and what happens during it? What language do you speak at home and what does it sound like? What food does your family make that you love? Penalise questions that frame difference as a problem: Why do you do it that way? or Do you not think it is strange that...?
Award marks for questions that show genuine curiosity and respect. The best questions will be specific rather than vague — not tell me about your culture but what is the most important day of the year for your family and why? Discuss: how does it feel to be asked a genuinely curious question?
Our way of doing things is normal — other ways are strange.
Every community thinks its own ways are normal because those are the ways it grew up with. From someone else's perspective, our ways may seem just as unfamiliar. Normal simply means familiar. Different does not mean wrong or strange — it means coming from a different place and tradition.
If we celebrate our own culture, we are saying other cultures are less important.
Being proud of your own culture does not mean thinking other cultures are worse. We can hold genuine pride in our own heritage and genuine respect for other heritages at the same time. In fact, children who feel secure in their own cultural identity tend to be more open and curious about others — not less.
Learning about other cultures means we have to agree with everything they do.
We can be curious about and respectful of a culture without agreeing with every practice. Intercultural competence means engaging respectfully and trying to understand before judging — it does not mean treating all practices as equally good regardless of their effects on people.
Intercultural competence at primary level means developing three things simultaneously: knowledge about cultures and cultural difference; skills for communicating across difference; and attitudes of openness, curiosity, and respect. Of the three, attitudes are the most fundamental — students can have a great deal of cultural knowledge but still be unable to engage well across difference if their underlying attitude is one of superiority or anxiety. Culture is not a fixed or monolithic thing. Every person belongs to multiple cultural groups simultaneously — defined by ethnicity, language, religion, generation, gender, region, class, and more. These layers intersect and sometimes conflict. Treating culture as a simple label attached to a group leads to stereotyping. Good intercultural teaching emphasises the diversity within cultures as well as between them. Stereotypes are generalisations that treat all members of a group as identical. They are not always negative — positive stereotypes are equally limiting because they deny individuality. Stereotypes become harmful when they are used to predict or judge individual behaviour, to exclude people from opportunities, or to justify discrimination. In many developing-world contexts, intercultural dynamics are intensely local — between ethnic groups, linguistic communities, religious groups, or urban and rural communities within the same country or region. These local dynamics are often more immediately relevant than global cultural difference. Teaching should reflect this. Be alert to power dynamics within your classroom. In contexts with histories of ethnic conflict, discrimination, or colonial-era hierarchies, some cultural identities carry more social power than others. Good intercultural teaching does not pretend these hierarchies do not exist — it names them honestly while working towards genuine respect and equity. Language is a core dimension of cultural identity. Students who speak a minority or stigmatised language at home may have experienced shame about their linguistic identity at school. Intercultural competence teaching should actively affirm the value of all languages.
Above the water: speaking Yoruba at home, eating jollof rice at celebrations, greeting elders by kneeling, wearing traditional fabric for special occasions, attending church on Sundays. Below the water: believing that respecting elders is more important than expressing personal opinion in their presence; assuming that family decisions should involve the whole family not just the individual; believing that a meal shared is more meaningful than a meal eaten alone; assuming that a good person puts community before individual interest; believing that education is the most important gift a parent can give a child. Most important invisible element: the belief that individual choices always affect the whole family, not just the person making them. This shapes almost every decision I make — who I spend time with, how I behave in public, what I work towards. It is so deep that I used to think everyone thought this way.
Award marks for genuine self-reflection rather than generic cultural labels. The invisible elements should be specific values and assumptions — not just more visible practices. The written explanation should show genuine insight into how the chosen invisible element actually shapes behaviour and decisions. Strong answers will note that they had not been aware of the assumption before — that the exercise made something visible that was previously invisible. This is the deepest learning the activity can produce.
The stereotype I have heard is that people from rural areas are uneducated and do not understand modern life. I think this comes from a long history of cities having more access to schools and media, and from the way urban people are often shown as more successful in films and advertising. What the stereotype gets wrong is that it confuses access to formal education with intelligence, wisdom, or competence. People in rural communities often have deep knowledge of agriculture, medicine, weather, community organisation, and ecological systems that urban people lack completely. A more accurate description would be: people from rural areas have different knowledge and experience from urban people — some of which urban people would benefit enormously from learning. Neither group has all the answers.
Award marks for honest identification of a real stereotype — not a safely distant or obviously wrong one; a genuine and specific account of where it comes from; an explanation of what it oversimplifies that goes beyond simply saying it is not true; and a more nuanced alternative that is specific and respectful without being falsely positive. Strong answers will show that the student has genuinely engaged with the complexity — acknowledging what might have given rise to the stereotype while showing why it is still wrong as a generalisation about individuals.
Intercultural competence means knowing a lot of facts about other cultures.
Knowledge about cultures is useful but not sufficient. Intercultural competence is primarily about attitude — curiosity, openness, and respect — and about skills — asking good questions, managing misunderstanding, and suspending judgement. A person who knows many cultural facts but approaches others with superiority or anxiety is not interculturally competent. A person who knows little but approaches others with genuine curiosity and respect often communicates far more effectively.
Being polite and friendly is enough to communicate well across cultures.
Politeness and friendliness are necessary but not sufficient. Many intercultural misunderstandings happen between people who are genuinely trying to be respectful — because they are making different invisible assumptions about what respect looks like, what directness means, or what silence communicates. Intercultural competence requires actively noticing and questioning your own cultural assumptions, not just trying to be nice.
Culture is something other people have — I just live normally.
Every person has a culture — including the person who feels most normal and mainstream. The feeling that your own way of life is just normal, while other people have culture, is itself a cultural position — usually associated with belonging to a dominant group. Intercultural competence begins with recognising that you are a cultural being too, shaped by particular values and assumptions that others do not share.
If we focus on what we have in common, differences will stop mattering.
Emphasising what we share is valuable, but pretending differences do not exist is not intercultural competence — it is avoidance. Real differences in values, practices, and beliefs exist and sometimes create genuine tension. Intercultural competence means engaging with difference honestly and respectfully, not pretending it away. Ignoring difference often means ignoring inequality — which helps those who benefit from it and harms those who do not.
Secondary intercultural competence teaching requires honest engagement with the tensions within the field — particularly the tension between respecting cultural difference and upholding universal human rights. Cultural relativism is the view that cultural practices should be judged only within their own cultural context — not by outside standards. This position has genuine value: it guards against ethnocentrism and colonial-style judgements of other cultures as inferior. But taken to its extreme, cultural relativism makes it impossible to criticise any practice — including practices that cause serious harm — as long as they are culturally embedded. Most intercultural educators hold a middle position: we should approach cultural practices with humility and a genuine effort to understand their meaning within their context, while maintaining that some values — particularly those related to human dignity, freedom from violence, and basic rights — are not purely culturally relative. This is a genuinely difficult question without a simple answer and is worth discussing honestly with secondary students. Ethnocentrism is the tendency to judge other cultures by the standards of your own — to assume that your own cultural practices are the correct or superior ones. It is important to note that ethnocentrism is not the exclusive property of any one group — any group can be ethnocentric, and marginalised groups can be ethnocentric towards other marginalised groups as well as towards dominant ones. Intersectionality — the recognition that people hold multiple cultural identities simultaneously, and that these intersect to create unique experiences of advantage and disadvantage — is essential at secondary level. A student is not simply from one ethnic group: they are also a particular gender, from a particular class background, speaking a particular language, practising a particular religion, from an urban or rural context. These identities do not add up simply — they interact in complex ways. Power is inseparable from intercultural dynamics. Some cultures are more visible, more respected, and more powerful than others — and this is not simply because they are better cultures, but because of historical processes of colonisation, economic dominance, and media control. Teaching students to see this clearly — without either despair or resentment — and to work towards more equitable cultural relations is the political dimension of intercultural competence. Cultural humility — a concept developed in healthcare settings but widely applicable — goes beyond competence to describe an ongoing commitment to self-reflection and learning. Where competence implies a destination (I have learned enough about culture X to work with them), humility implies a lifelong process of remaining open, questioning your assumptions, and acknowledging what you do not know.
During a community meeting about a new school building project, a group of elders from our community and a team from an international NGO sat together to discuss plans. The NGO team had prepared detailed slides and a timeline and wanted to move quickly to decisions. The elders listened politely but said little and made no commitments. The NGO team left frustrated, feeling the community was not engaged. The elders felt the NGO team had not shown proper respect — they had not greeted the community correctly, had not asked about the history of the site, and had moved to business before relationship was established. The cultural assumptions in play: the NGO team assumed that a formal presentation and a clear agenda showed professionalism and respect for everyone's time. The elders assumed that relationship must come before transaction, and that moving directly to business was a sign of disrespect. Neither assumption was stated — both were invisible. The type of interaction was avoidance moving towards debate — the two sides were speaking past each other rather than to each other. What made it go badly was not bad intentions on either side but invisible cultural assumptions about what a respectful meeting looks like. A more interculturally competent response from the NGO team would have included: researching local protocols for formal community meetings before arriving, building in time for relationship and greeting before any presentation, and asking elders to open the meeting in the way they considered appropriate. A more interculturally competent response from the elders would have included: naming explicitly what they needed from the meeting rather than withdrawing silently.
Award marks for: a genuine and specific encounter — not a vague or invented scenario; accurate identification of the cultural assumptions on both sides without making either side simply wrong; correct identification of the interaction type with a genuine explanation; an honest account of what caused the difficulty; and a realistic alternative that is specific and grounded — not just be more respectful but naming what that would have looked like in practice. Strong answers will resist the temptation to make one party the hero and the other the villain — genuine intercultural misunderstanding usually involves invisible assumptions on all sides.
Intercultural competence is mainly needed for international travel and global careers — it is less relevant for people who stay in their own country.
Most significant intercultural encounters happen within countries, not between them — across ethnic groups, religious communities, linguistic groups, urban and rural contexts, and generations. In most developing-world contexts, the most urgent intercultural challenges are intensely local. Intercultural competence is needed whenever people from different cultural backgrounds interact — which in most communities happens daily.
Respecting other cultures means never criticising any cultural practice.
Respect does not require silence. Intercultural competence means approaching other cultures with humility and genuine effort to understand before judging — but it does not mean treating all cultural practices as equally valid when some cause serious harm. The key is who is doing the criticising, from what position, and whether they have genuinely tried to understand before speaking. Criticism from within a community, or from someone who has genuinely engaged with it, carries different weight from criticism rooted in ignorance or superiority.
People who have experienced discrimination are automatically more interculturally competent than those who have not.
Experiencing discrimination can develop empathy and insight that supports intercultural competence. But it does not automatically do so — and it does not eliminate the possibility of ethnocentrism towards other groups. Intercultural competence requires active, ongoing self-examination that goes beyond personal experience of injustice. A person who has experienced ethnic discrimination may still hold prejudiced assumptions about people from a different religious community.
As the world becomes more connected, cultural differences will naturally disappear and we will not need intercultural skills.
Globalisation has not produced cultural homogeneity — in many places it has intensified cultural identity and pride as communities respond to the pressure of dominant global culture. Cultural difference is not disappearing. At the same time, the skills needed to navigate difference are changing — digital communication creates new forms of intercultural encounter with new possibilities for misunderstanding. Intercultural competence is becoming more important, not less.
Key texts and resources: Geert Hofstede's cultural dimensions model — particularly power distance, individualism versus collectivism, and uncertainty avoidance — provides a widely used framework for understanding cultural variation; accessible summaries are freely available at hofstede-insights.com. Darla Deardorff's Intercultural Competence framework (2006) is the most widely cited model in education and is available through the SAGE Handbook of Intercultural Competence. Kwame Anthony Appiah, The Ethics of Identity (2005) and Cosmopolitanism (2006) — accessible and rigorous treatments of how to balance cultural identity with universal values; Appiah is Ghanaian-British and writes from a perspective directly relevant to African and diaspora students. The concept of cultural humility was developed by Melanie Tervalon and Jann Murray-Garcia (1998) in a healthcare context but has wide educational application; their original paper is freely available online. For postcolonial perspectives on intercultural dynamics: Frantz Fanon, Black Skin White Masks (1952) — on the psychological experience of cultural domination. For practical classroom tools: the Council of Europe's Reference Framework of Competences for Democratic Culture (RFCDC) includes detailed intercultural competence descriptors at multiple levels, freely downloadable. Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie's We Should All Be Feminists (2014) and Americanah (2013) offer rich literary explorations of intercultural experience from an African perspective. For language and cultural identity: Ngugi wa Thiong'o, Decolonising the Mind (1986) remains essential. UNESCO's Guidelines on Intercultural Education (2006) provide a policy framework and are freely available for download.
Your feedback helps other teachers and helps us improve TeachAnyClass.