About the Chinese Scenarios

The SitchLab App presents cultural scenarios into modules, representing major themes or Topics, such as “Behavior in Public.” For an interactive overview of the app’s navigation structure, visit the Quickstart Guide within the app. More information on the app structure can be found in the app section of this website.

Through the simulated scenarios in each module, users examine elements of Chinese culture across a range of geographic and situational contexts. The scenarios also challenge the user to think about and discuss methods for responding to everyday situations that one may encounter in China, using cues from the narrative and contextual information provided. Each scenario is preceded by a chart that sets up the context of the situation, followed by the narrative or vignette that presents a story. Each story contains a chain of events which results in a cultural misunderstanding or inappropriate response.

After reviewing the scenario, the user is given several (usually four) options that attempt to provide an explanation as to what went wrong, what action should have taken place, what actions could still be used to improve the situation’s outcome, or what actions to avoid. Each option or judgment task gives the user an opportunity to ponder and then rate their personal agreement with an explanatory statement or possible course of action.

The judgment tasks in each scenario were rated by a panel of scholars familiar with Chinese culture and language and provide feedback on the user’s responses. In the feedback, the user sees their own response juxtaposed with a reference range. The reference range represents a “zone of convergence” that members of Chinese-speaking cultures would generally share with regard to each judgment task statement. A small range indicates greater agreement among members of the culture, while a wider range indicates expanded perspectives or a generally wider range of views.

Approaching the Scenarios

Before using the materials, it is important to note that the focus of each situation should not be on finding the “right” or “wrong” answer. Although judgment tasks are rated on a scale indicating acceptability, you might also think of this in terms of “more contextually appropriate” or “less contextually appropriate” responses, or even “more constructive” or “less constructive” responses.

Due to the non-binary nature of culture, the judgment tasks and associated ratings are meant to serve as a jumping off point to generate conversation and discussion about varying perspectives. While some situations presented are mostly straightforward, others may not have a clear or precise answer. Some may have multiple methods of approach. It is also useful to take into account additional nuances in the context that may even change the whole outcome or course for dealing with a situation in a contextually appropriate manner. For example, the response to a scenario may depend on several variables, which could alter the way one would handle the situation, such as who is the person performing an action, elements related to time, mode of communication, etc. These, along with many other factors, can all influence the way to successfully manage the outcome of a scenario. By changing even one of these elements, a different result may be the consequence.

By eliminating the focus on finding the “right” or “wrong” answer, these materials aim to generate discussion centered on the implications of each possibility. Because social and communication contexts can vary across settings, it is beneficial for the instructor to also weigh in and explain their viewpoint, especially if it is different from the one presented in these materials. In the end, the scenarios are tools to increase pragmatic knowledge, greater dialogue and overall awareness. Reflecting on the experience, whether it be lived or hypothetical, can help learners better navigate real-world interactions. To further contextualize the events that have taken place, many scenarios provide a Culture Note and a Language Note (placed before or after a judgment task) as an additional resource, and many also include a Reflection task that can be used for guided discussion and further expansion on the topic in the classroom.

Instructors should consult the Instructor’s Manual for further context, including project credits and an updated list of scenarios in the InContext app. For specific ideas for classroom and tutoring contexts-of-use, follow the link to the Pedagogical Guide. 

Modules

Acknowledgements

The materials developed for this project were originally created with federal funding during the period 2017 through 2020. These materials remain available to the public thanks to the support of the Center for Language & Technology at the University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa. The names and affiliations listed below correspond to the grant period.

Principal Investigator and Project Director

Yea-Fen Chen, Indiana University

Assistant Director

Tianyu Qin, University of North Georgia

Pedagogy Lead

Stephen Tschudi, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa

Instructional Technology Lead

Julio Rodríguez, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa

Instructional Design Team Leads

Yea-Fen Chen, Indiana University
Charles Egan, San Francisco State University
Tianyu Qin, University of North Georgia
Madeline Spring, University of Hawai‘i

Assessment Leads

Jianhua Bai, Kenyon College
Zhuo Jing-Schmidt, University of Oregon

Assessment Expert

Mindy King, Limelight Analytics

Project Coordinators

Neeli Kasdorf, Indiana University
Drew Kunard, Indiana University

Content Development and Testing

Yingling Bao, Indiana University
Xiaoying Liles, Indiana University
Tiao-Guan Huang, DePauw University
Ying-Ju Chen, Chinese Flagship Capstone Year Program, Taipei
Yu-Ting Jian, Indiana University
Yu-Ting Tseng, Indiana University
Yi Chun Kuo, Indiana University
Yu-Chi Tong, Indiana University

Project Consultants

Der-lin Chao, Hunter College, CUNY
Ming-Ying Li, Hunter College, CUNY
Yuhshi Lee, Wenzao Ursuline University of Languages

Data and Content Entry

Stephen Tschudi, University of Hawaiʻi
Tian Wang, University of Hawaiʻi

Images and Graphic Design

Julio C. Rodriguez, University of Hawaiʻi

Pedagogical Consultation and Review

Shuai Li, Georgia State University
Feng Xiao, Pomona College

This website and the SitchLab application were developed and are maintained by the Center for Language & Technology at the University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa. The views, interpretations, and other content presented on this website or through the SitchLab application are solely those of the authors and contributors and do not necessarily represent the official position, policy, or views of the U.S. Government. Reference to, or support for, this project by any U.S. Government agency does not constitute or imply official endorsement of the content, products, services, or viewpoints presented herein.