International student mobility has accelerated in recent decades, shaped by more accessible international travel, policy discourses on transnational cooperation and globalization, and the perceived value of overseas experience for educational and socioeconomic advancement (McGregor and Plews, 2022). In Irish higher education, internationalization has continued to expand, and study abroad programmes remain a central mechanism through which institutions seek to cultivate graduates' global outlooks and intercultural capabilities (OECD, 2023). Within this context, intercultural communicative competence (ICC) has become an increasingly explicit learning outcome in foreign language education, with direct implications for curriculum design and pedagogy.

Ireland's engagement with China has also intensified over the past four decades, alongside growing student interest in Chinese language learning. Chinese studies provision has expanded across Irish higher education since the establishment of the first-degree programme in 2006, and Chinese language modules are frequently embedded within multidisciplinary programmes (e.g., business, law, and translation) (Osborne et al., 2019). As a result, Irish CFL programmes increasingly position intercultural learning as a priority, often relying on short-term mobility experiences to support students' intercultural development.

In this study, study abroad is defined as an academic experience through which students fulfill degree requirements via educational activities undertaken outside their home country (Sanz and Morales-Front, 2018). Blended learning refers to the deliberate integration of face-to-face instruction with online learning supported by internet technologies (Bonk and Graham, 2012). The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted conventional mobility worldwide and accelerated interest in online and blended alternatives, highlighting both opportunities for access and persistent challenges such as reduced peer contact and limited social engagement (Svanholm, 2020). These developments underscore the need to examine culturally responsive pedagogies that can foster intercultural learning within blended study abroad settings.

ICC can be understood as the capability to interact effectively and appropriately with people from different cultural backgrounds (Deardorff, 2006). In language education, research has long argued that intercultural learning is strengthened when language instruction is integrated with culturally responsive pedagogies rather than treated as an “add-on” (Byram, 2021). For example, Gu (2015) shows that purposeful cultural activities can support learners' intercultural development in classroom contexts. However, in Irish higher education—particularly within beginner-level CFL programmes delivered through short-term blended study abroad—there remains limited empirical evidence on how structured, experiential cultural learning can be designed and evaluated.

Post-pandemic research agendas increasingly focus on blended and online mobility models and their implications for intercultural learning (Liu and Shirley, 2021). Responding to this gap, the present protocol examines whether experiential Chinese cultural workshops embedded within an 11-week blended CFL course can support ICC development across cognitive and affective domains. Conceptually, Byram's ICC model is used to operationalise teachable and observable ICC components (the five “savoirs”), while Deardorff's work informs the interpretation of ICC as an interactional competence that develops through iterative engagement, reflection, and practice (Byram, 1997; Deardorff, 2006).

The study is situated in a private higher education institution in Dublin, Ireland, offering a one-semester study abroad programme in which a foreign language module is available as an elective for International Business students. Since 2018, students have been able to select Mandarin Chinese or Spanish. The beginner Mandarin course typically enrolls 20–30 students per semester, most with no prior Chinese learning experience. The cohort is internationally diverse, including students from multiple European countries (e.g., Germany and Greece). The module is delivered in a blended format over 11 weeks, with weekly 3-h sessions combining synchronous face-to-face teaching and asynchronous online learning. Consistent with the programme's intended learning outcomes, the module aims to develop students' ICC through integrated language-and-culture learning.

Module evaluation data and student feedback from the January 2022 cohort informed a subsequent redesign. Two recurring challenges were identified: (1) limited opportunities for cultural immersion and authentic interaction when learning Chinese in Ireland, and (2) difficulties establishing sustained peer interaction and social cohesion within a blended learning environment, particularly during synchronous online elements. In response, the module was redesigned in September 2022 to include five experiential cultural workshops across the 11-week course (Chinese New Year Festival, Chinese Dining Etiquette, Traditional Chinese Medicine, Calligraphy, and Chinese Tea Ceremony). The workshops emphasize hands-on engagement with cultural artifacts, guided input (including a wellbeing-focused guest session with Tai Chi demonstration), and structured reflection through assessed online reflective logs.

This protocol investigates whether experiential cultural workshops embedded within a blended beginner CFL study abroad module are associated with changes in learners' ICC, and how learners describe the mechanisms and learning conditions through which any development occurs.

This study adopts a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design, prioritizing quantitative evidence in Phase 1 and using qualitative data in Phase 2 to explain, elaborate, and contextualize the quantitative patterns (Creswell and Plano Clark, 2011; Cohen et al., 2018; Denscombe, 2014). The design aligns with the study aims because it enables (a) an estimate of pre–post change within one cohort and (b) an interpretation of how learners experience workshops and blended learning conditions that may underpin observed patterns.

Phase 1 uses a one-group pre–post approach to examine within-cohort change over the 11-week course. Phase 2 uses purposive sampling informed by Phase 1 patterns (e.g., typical cases and outliers) to explore learners' accounts of intercultural learning processes and perceived enabling/limiting conditions. Integration occurs through connecting (using Phase 1 results to inform Phase 2 sampling and interview foci) and through merged interpretation when reporting how qualitative themes help explain quantitative trends.

This protocol contributes to research and practice in three ways. First, it extends the limited evidence base on ICC development among beginner-level CFL learners in Irish higher education contexts, where research has more often focused on English or long-established European language settings. Second, it responds to an emerging need to understand intercultural learning within blended study abroad models, which are increasingly used alongside (or in place of) traditional mobility formats. Third, it offers a structured, replicable approach to embedding experiential cultural workshops into a blended CFL module and evaluating their contribution to ICC development using triangulated evidence. The findings are intended to inform culturally responsive curriculum design in short-term blended study abroad programmes and to support educators in implementing workshop-based intercultural pedagogy with clearer evaluative logic.

Over the past decade, intercultural communicative competence (ICC) has become increasingly central to research on study abroad and foreign language education. Diller and Moule and Diller (2005) distinguish two broad approaches to cultural competence development, namely pedagogical and psychological perspectives, which include attention to intercultural learning outcomes and intercultural sensitivity. In language education, scholars have emphasized that ICC involves not only knowledge about culturally different others, but also an understanding of how language mediates intercultural encounters and the development of critical thinking to evaluate cultural difference (Fantini, 2009; Kramsch, 2011). These strands collectively support the argument that ICC should be developed through explicit pedagogical design rather than assumed as a by-product of mobility.

Byram (1997) and Arasaratnam (2009) define ICC as the capacity to interact effectively with people from different cultural backgrounds whilst using a second language, with an emphasis on establishing and maintaining relationships rather than simply exchanging information. In parallel, policy and curriculum frameworks in language education have increasingly foregrounded intercultural learning aims. For example, the CEFR and its later developments highlight the intercultural dimension of language learning and the value of engaging with diverse beliefs and practices (Council of Europe, 2020). Similarly, American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (2020) and The Office of Chinese Language Council International (2010) position intercultural learning outcomes as important elements of language education. In Ireland, Languages Connect: Ireland's Plan for Foreign Languages in Education 2017–2026 also emphasizes linguistic and intercultural competencies across education sectors, which is aligned with the broader prominence of mobility and internationalization in higher education.

At the same time, research cautions against equating linguistic competence or overseas experience with ICC development. Learners often require structured opportunities to engage with cultural content and to reflect critically on intercultural experiences (Godwin-Jones, 2013; Lomicka and Ducate, 2019). Deardorff (2006) further argues that assessing ICC needs to capture skills, attitudes, and cultural awareness, rather than only measuring knowledge acquisition. Empirical studies increasingly challenge the “immersion assumption”. Jackson (2017), drawing on interviews with Hong Kong and Mainland Chinese short-term exchange students, shows that overseas experience alone is frequently insufficient for the development of intercultural sensitivity and global awareness. Tanabe (2019) longitudinal study of Japanese students in Hungary similarly indicates that authentic social interaction—such as visits to local homes and sustained networking with local and international peers—supports intercultural growth and critical cultural awareness. However, research on ICC development among CFL learners in Irish study abroad contexts remain limited. This gap suggests a need to examine how ICC develops for CFL students in short-term blended study abroad experiences in Irish higher education institutions.

Language and culture are fundamentally interdependent, and this relationship is central to ICC development in language education (Wang et al., 2022). Jackson (2009) suggests that ICC development does not necessarily progress in parallel with linguistic proficiency, which strengthens the rationale for integrating culture through holistic, dynamic, reflective, and critical pedagogical approaches (Liddicoat and Scarino, 2013). Yet study abroad research has historically been dominated by Western language contexts, particularly English and American cultures (Dewey et al., 2013). As a result, learner-centered research on Chinese culture learning and teaching in Irish CFL study abroad contexts remains underdeveloped.

Within this landscape, ICC pedagogical tools—classroom resources and instructional strategies designed to develop intercultural competence—become especially important (Oranje, 2016). Experiential cultural workshops have been proposed as a potentially effective tool in CFL education (Yun, 2022), but prior research also highlights limitations in how “culture” is operationalised. East (2012), for instance, reports that although teachers recognize the importance of cultural learning, classroom practice may become narrowly artifact-focused, risking superficial engagement with culture. Liu (2022) uses classroom observations, interviews, and reflective journals to examine intercultural activity in CFL teaching for international university students in China, yet the study offers less direct insight into learners' self-assessments and perspectives on effectiveness. Wang (2017) further cautions that cultural events may reinforce stereotypes when symbolic cultural elements are over-emphasized, indicating the need for culturally responsive pedagogy that supports deeper intercultural understanding.

Ganassin (2019) examines the construction of Chinese culture in UK educational contexts and reports that students value experiential cultural activities, which supports arguments for integrating culturally responsive learning opportunities into CFL courses. However, synthesis across studies (Moloney, 2013; Biebricher et al., 2019; Yun, 2022) indicates that implementing intercultural activities in CFL remains pedagogically challenging and that evidence on “what works, for whom, and under which conditions” remains incomplete. These gaps strengthen the rationale for research that links workshop design explicitly to ICC dimensions and evaluates learning outcomes using multiple forms of evidence.

Blended learning combines online and face-to-face instruction by integrating synchronous and asynchronous learning modes (Graham, 2012; Liu and Shirley, 2021). In CFL education, adoption of blended learning accelerated during and after the COVID-19 pandemic, and learners increasingly rely on technology to access language and cultural learning content (Wang et al., 2022). Blended learning can be valuable in study abroad contexts because it offers flexibility and additional channels for interaction and reflection, whilst retaining structured pedagogical support.

Nevertheless, the evidence base for ICC development in blended CFL contexts remains limited. Wang and Devitt (2022) report that, within the literature on computer-mediated communication in CFL (2008–2022), relatively few studies use blended learning as an explicit theoretical framework. Sugie and Mitsugi (2014) examine a three-phase blended CFL programme in Japan, and Huang and Lin (2011) explore Web 2.0 tools in CFL instruction, yet both focus primarily on linguistic outcomes, learner autonomy, and motivation rather than offering sustained analysis of intercultural competence development or interactional processes. Qu and Hagley (2021) combine Moodle-enabled blended learning with international virtual exchange and report positive learner experiences and increased motivation and cross-cultural sensitivity. Even so, research that examines ICC development in blended study abroad contexts—particularly within European higher education settings—remains underdeveloped, supporting the need for further investigation.

This study draws on two complementary theoretical frameworks to examine ICC development through experiential cultural workshops in a blended CFL context: Byram's (1997) model of intercultural communicative competence and Kolb's (1984) Experiential Learning Theory (ELT). Together, these frameworks clarify both the intended intercultural learning outcomes and the pedagogical processes through which workshop-based learning may support those outcomes.

Byram's ICC model conceptualizes ICC as the ability to relate to and communicate effectively with people who speak a different language and live in different cultural contexts (Byram, 1997, 2021). The model comprises five interdependent dimensions (the “savoirs”): attitudes (savoir être), knowledge (savoirs), skills of interpreting and relating (savoir comprendre), skills of discovery and interaction (savoir apprendre/faire), and critical cultural awareness (savoir s'engager). These dimensions provide an explicit structure for mapping workshop objectives to ICC development and for interpreting how learners describe changes in intercultural understanding and engagement.

Kolb's ELT complements Byram's model by explaining how learning may occur through a cyclical process of concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation (Kolb, 1984). In this study, the cultural workshops provide structured cultural experiences, reflective logs support systematic reflection, and learners are encouraged to connect experiences to intercultural concepts and apply emerging understanding in subsequent interactions within the blended learning environment. The integration of Byram's ICC model and Kolb's ELT therefore provides a coherent basis for aligning workshop design, data collection, and interpretation of ICC development in this protocol.

This study is a single-case mixed-methods protocol situated in an 11-week blended Chinese-as-a-foreign-language (CFL) module within a short-term study abroad programme at an Irish private higher education institution. The design addresses a common challenge in language education settings where intercultural communicative competence (ICC) is an intended outcome, yet opportunities for immersion and sustained intercultural interaction are constrained. A mixed-methods approach is used to examine change in students' self-reported ICC across the course and explain how students experience, interpret and enact intercultural learning through experiential cultural workshops in a blended learning environment.

This research will include several elements, which may be summarized in Table 1.

The study adopts a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design (QUAN → qual). Phase 1 prioritizes quantitative evidence of pre–post change in ICC. Phase 2 then uses qualitative data to explain, elaborate and contextualize the Phase 1 patterns (for example, domains showing stronger or weaker change, and individual variation). Integration occurs in two planned ways. First, connecting is used, whereby Phase 1 results inform the purposive sampling strategy and shape the Phase 2 interview prompts. Second, merging is used at interpretation, by bringing quantitative results and qualitative themes together (e.g., in a joint narrative or joint display) to identify convergence, divergence and plausible pedagogical mechanisms.

To strengthen transparency and replicability, a table will be added linking each research question to its primary data source(s) and analytic approach, as recommended in the reviewer feedback.

Phase 1 will include the full cohort enrolled on the beginner Mandarin module (expected n = 20–30 per semester). Phase 2 will draw on purposive sampling from Phase 1 participants who provide consent for qualitative participation and recording use, with an expected interview sub-sample of approximately 10–12 students. Sampling will be structured to capture variation indicated by Phase 1 results (e.g., higher and lower ICC change scores and contrasting domain profiles), supporting explanation rather than representativeness.

This protocol involves human participants (students) and includes surveys, interviews, reflective writing and classroom/workshop recordings; therefore, the manuscript will include a full ethics statement consistent with Frontiers' human-participant requirements. Specifically, the Methods section will state the ethics committee review/approval (or formal exemption/waiver), written informed consent procedures, participants' right to withdraw without penalty, and safeguards for confidentiality and anonymisation (including de-identification of transcripts and removal of identifying details). Data will be stored securely with access restricted to the research team, and retention will follow institutional policy.

Given the teacher–researcher relationship, additional steps will be stated to mitigate power dynamics, including: participation being voluntary and separate from assessment decisions; alternative learning activities available without disadvantage; explicit consent for recording use; and recruitment/consent processes structured to minimize perceived coercion.

Following Cohen, Manion and Morrison's guidance on using statistical software to generate and report descriptive outputs, survey responses will be processed in SPSS to produce the required descriptive statistics. Taylor and Francis Mean scores will then be interpreted using a five-category scale adapted from DeWitt et al. (2022) and prior studies adopting similar cut-points (see Tables 2, 3), ranging from very low to extremely high.

To examine pre–post change, paired-samples t-tests will be conducted when distributional assumptions are acceptable. Normality will be checked using the Shapiro–Wilk test; where assumptions are not supported, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests will be used. Statistical significance will be set at p < 0.05. Given the small cohort size and multiple comparisons across ICC dimensions, interpretation will prioritize effect sizes and the pattern of results across measures rather than p-values alone.

Effect sizes will be reported alongside p-values to support interpretation of practical significance. Cohen's d will be reported for paired t-tests, and rank-biserial correlation will be reported for Wilcoxon tests. These effect-size estimates will be interpreted in relation to the educational context and the one-group design rather than as definitive evidence of intervention impact.

Internal consistency of the SISA instrument in the target sample will be examined and reported for the overall scale and, where appropriate, for each ICC dimension using Cronbach's alpha (α). Reliability estimates will be interpreted with attention to the small sample size and the characteristics of the cohort.

Missing data and attrition will be documented transparently. The primary pre–post analysis will be conducted using paired cases with complete pre- and post-test scores. The proportion and pattern of missingness will be reported, and sensitivity checks will be conducted where feasible to assess whether conclusions change under different reasonable handling decisions. Attrition rates will be calculated and any available reasons for attrition will be summarized to support assessment of potential bias.

Potential sources of bias will be acknowledged when interpreting quantitative findings, including social desirability responding, expectancy effects, and limitations inherent to self-report measurement of ICC. These limitations will be addressed through triangulation with qualitative and observational data sources in Phase 2.

Qualitative data from semi-structured interview transcripts, reflective blog entries, and selected excerpts from Zoom class recordings will be analyzed using thematic analysis following six-stage approach, supported by NVivo (version 12). Familiarization will involve repeated reading and initial memoing to capture early patterns relevant to ICC development and learning processes. Initial coding will be conducted systematically across the dataset. Coding will combine (i) inductive codes that arise from participants' accounts and (ii) deductive codes informed by Byram's five ICC dimensions and Kolb's experiential learning cycle, reflecting the study's stated theoretical frameworks. Pasted Codes will be grouped into candidate themes that explain how learners describe (and demonstrate) intercultural learning through workshops and within the blended learning environment. Themes will be reviewed against the coded extracts and the full dataset, refined for coherence and distinctiveness, and then defined and named with clear links to the research questions. Reporting will use anonymised illustrative extracts to demonstrate how themes support interpretation.

To strengthen credibility, three procedures will be implemented. First, a subset of the interview data (approximately 20%) will be independently coded by a second coder, with discrepancies resolved through discussion to refine the coding frame. Second, a brief summary of preliminary themes (approximately 1–2 pages) will be shared with a small number of participants for feedback on interpretive resonance. Third, triangulation will be used to compare themes across interviews, blogs, and recorded classroom interactions, noting convergence and divergence across data sources.

Methodological triangulation across surveys, interviews, blogs, and recorded sessions will be used to strengthen the trustworthiness of findings. The limitations of the one-group pre-test/post-test design will be stated explicitly. Without a comparison group, observed changes cannot be attributed causally to the workshops, and alternative explanations (e.g., maturation, testing effects, concurrent experiences, and regression to the mean) remain possible.

The reliance on self-report data (SISA) will be addressed by incorporating reflective and observational evidence. Zoom recordings and blogs will be treated as observational/interactional and reflective evidence that can contextualize self-assessments (for example, by identifying instances of comparison, negotiation of meaning, perspective-taking, or critical reflection aligned with ICC dimensions), rather than as “objective” measures.

The teacher–researcher dual role will be managed through explicit safeguards described in the ethics section (voluntary participation, separation from grading decisions, clear consent for recording use, right to withdraw, and anonymisation). Reflexive documentation (e.g., a researcher journal and analytic memos) will be used to record decisions and potential influences throughout analysis.

Integration of quantitative and qualitative findings will proceed through (1) connecting, where Phase 1 patterns inform Phase 2 sampling and interview focus, and (2) merging, where results are brought together during interpretation. A joint display (table or figure) will be used to align quantitative changes by ICC dimension with the qualitative themes and supporting excerpts, enabling transparent identification of convergence, complementarity, and divergence.

Informed consent will be obtained from all participants prior to their involvement in the study. A detailed information sheet will be provided to all potential participants, outlining the purpose of the research, the nature of their involvement, the data collection procedures, the potential benefits and risks, and the measures taken to ensure confidentiality and data protection. Participants will be explicitly informed that their participation is voluntary and that they have the right to withdraw from the study at any time without penalty or consequence. Written consent will be obtained from all participants before any data is collected. For online surveys, consent will be obtained through a checkbox at the beginning of the survey, confirming that participants have read and understood the information sheet and agree to participate.

To ensure confidentiality, all participants will be assigned pseudonyms, and any identifying information will be removed from transcripts, blog entries, and other data. Data will be stored securely on a password-protected and encrypted computer, with access restricted to the research team. Audio recordings of interviews will be transcribed and then deleted. All data will be stored for a minimum of 5 years following the completion of the study, in accordance with institutional policy. The data will be used for research purposes only and will not be shared with any third parties without the explicit consent of participants.

The researcher's dual role as teacher and researcher presents potential power dynamics that could influence participant responses and create a sense of obligation to participate. To mitigate this, several measures will be taken. First, participants will be explicitly informed that their decision to participate or not participate will have no impact on their course grades or their relationship with the researcher. Second, the researcher will engage in reflexive practices, including maintaining a research journal to document reflections on the research process, potential biases, and decisions made during analysis. Third, regular debriefing sessions will be held with a co-researcher to discuss potential biases and alternative interpretations of data. These measures will help to ensure that the research is conducted in an ethical and transparent manner, and that the findings are not unduly influenced by the researcher's positionality.

The study is designed to maximize benefits for participants and minimize potential harm. The primary benefit for participants is the opportunity to engage in experiential cultural workshops that may enhance their intercultural communicative competence and their understanding of Chinese culture. The research findings will also contribute to the broader field of language education, with potential benefits for educators, curriculum designers, and policymakers. Potential risks are minimal and may include discomfort during interviews when discussing personal experiences or reflections. To minimize this risk, participants will be informed that they can decline to answer any questions they are not comfortable with and can stop the interview at any time. The researcher will also be sensitive to participants' emotional wellbeing and will provide support and resources if needed.

Transparency and accountability will be maintained throughout the research process. The research protocol will be pre-registered, and the findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations. A summary of the findings will be made available to participants upon request. The research will be conducted in accordance with the ethical guidelines of the British Educational Research Association (BERA, 2018), which emphasize the importance of integrity, honesty, and respect in educational research. The researcher will be accountable to the participants, the institution, and the broader research community for the ethical conduct of the study.