Mixed-methods evaluation demonstrates enhanced cultural competence in U.S. students studying abroad, suggesting effective training for global health practices.
Purpose: Cultural responsiveness training and immersive international experiences were evaluated in students enrolled in the United States to South Africa Study Abroad Program. Method: A mixed-methods study design assessed students' ( n = 11) cultural awareness and competence in multiple program phases through a pretrip preparatory class, four administered surveys, and qualitative data from individual students' journals and a student group interview. Thematic analysis incorporated data from educator ( n = 4) interviews and reflexive program discussions. Educators provided clinical teaching in Phase 1 that supported students' clinical testing procedures in Phase 2. Results: Pretrip quantitative results on the Cultural Competence Checklist–Personal Reflection survey indicated high cultural awareness among students, and 91% identified as “near competent” on the Cultural Competence Self-Evaluation. The third pretrip survey (Diversity Awareness Profile) administered after the cultural competence class indicated that 45% of students were classified as “change agents.” These results were integrated with posttrip survey (Public Affairs Scale) mean scores of 4.2–4.5 per subscale and the qualitative thematic analysis results. Incorporating reflexive interpretation yielded four major themes, indicating that participants experienced cognitive and emotive learning, navigated tensions between the U.S. and local audiology standards, demonstrated enhanced learning through physical presence in context, and underwent phases of professional identity development. Overall findings reflected participants' development of cultural competence, ethical leadership, and community engagement. Conclusion: Structured cultural responsiveness training with immersive international experiences enhanced students' ability to provide culturally responsive care, emphasizing how critical reflection effectively prepared professionals for global health practices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ramkissoon et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: