| This thesis investigates the major components that contribute to the success and failure of community building within the institutionalized Intercultural House (icHouse) at a major US institution for higher education. Such houses are frequently found in American universities, but their overall success has not previously been discussed. My study followed the student participants in the icHouse for seven months during one school year as they went through all of the phases of community building---from the initial meeting of participants, through all of the icHouse events, including both formal and informal gatherings, to the concluding events of the year.;The theoretical approaches I chose to apply to the icHouse include major theories from the fields of intercultural communication, interpersonal communication and social psychology. With these lenses in mind, I posed my main research question: how does living in a designed community affect participants' views on the cultural other?;This question breaks down into three more specific issues which guides my exploration: (1) What role does "culture" play in the icHouse? (2) How do students in the icHouse use culture to build community? And ultimately, (3) Are programs like the icHouse worthwhile endeavors for universities?;My conclusion about the efficacy of the icHouse is that the success of the community depends on five contributing elements: (a) the selection of motivated students; (b) the commitment of the participants; (c) the natural emersion of leaders from within the group; (d) successful pairings of roommates and suitemates; and (e) a maintained interest in cultural issues by participants.;Before discussing these issues in-depth, I begin with a literature review (chapter 2) which covers previously conducted studies on culture, cultural identity, assimilation, roommates, and other International Houses. I also discuss the Contact Hypothesis and the Common Ingroup Identity Model (CIIM) which inform my approach to understanding the effects of intercultural living on the icHouse participants. My literature review is followed by an explanation of my methodology and a description of my data derived from ethnographic observations, interviews and surveys (chapter 3). Here, I also discuss the difficulty in labeling the students and explain that the cultural labels established in the past might not work as well in the new globalized world. Chapter 4 contains my analysis, and focuses on the specific elements that contribute to community building in the icHouse. I specify the importance of student selection, roommate assignments, student participation, and programming, and I explore the complex interaction of these influences. Chapter 5 summarizes the findings and concludes my thesis. |
