| The educational benefits of a diverse student body are clear. However, in order to reap the benefits associated with a diverse student body, campus leaders must create a campus environment that is welcoming and affirming, and fosters cross-cultural interactions. Student affairs professionals are uniquely positioned within the university to be instrumental to this process. To be effective, practitioners must be capable of understanding and interacting competently with diverse groups of students.;Regrettably, while the importance of intercultural competence among student affairs professionals is well documented, few scholars have endeavored to define what it means to be interculturally competent and fewer have developed methods for assessing efforts toward its development among professionals. Accordingly, the purpose of this study is two-fold. This study introduces to the field of student affairs, a new theoretical construct (Cultural Intelligence or CQ) and assessment instrument (Cultural Intelligence Survey) designed to assess intercultural competency. Second, this newer construct and instrumentation are used to address a series of research questions designed to be better understand the intercultural competency of a sample of student affairs administrators.;This study examines: 1) the relationships between demographic characteristics and intercultural competency of student affairs practitioners; 2) which and to what degree variables including: (a) years of professional service in student affairs, (b) frequency of on-going training regarding intercultural issues, (c) amount of time spent outside the US, and (d) direct experience with diverse others impact the outcome of assessment of intercultural cultural competency among student affairs practitioners; and 3) whether or not there are relationships between student affairs practitioner self and peer-assessments of intercultural competency.;In spring 2009, 465 student affairs practitioners completed three web-based instruments, the Cultural Intelligence Survey (CQS), developed by Ang, Van Dyne, Koh, and Ng (2004), the Multicultural Competence in Student Affairs-Preliminary 2 Scale (MCSA-P2) (Pope & Mueller, 2000), and a researcher developed Personal Data Form. Of this group, 52 practitioners also submitted the names and contact information of peers and students they believed could assess their intercultural competence. One hundred, eighty-eight individuals completed observer assessments.;Selected study findings: 1) Race and identification with a socially marginalized group were not be related to intercultural competence as assessed by the CQS; 2) Five experience variables, including international travel or living, training and workshop attendance, work place interactions with individuals from identity groups dissimilar to one's own, and workplace conversations about cultural difference accounted for 20% of the variance in intercultural competency; 3) Of the four factors that comprise cultural intelligence, practitioners rated themselves highest in meta-cognitive ability (higher order thought processes) and lowest in cognitive ability (procedural or crystallized knowledge). Finally, practitioner self-assessed intercultural competence was not related to peer assessed intercultural competence. The implications of and recommendations resulting from this research are discussed in detail. |
