CCDES Activity #2

Activity #2: Fishbowl

Objectives:
To illustrate how personal disclosures regarding one's beliefs and feelings of cross-cultural and bilingual relationships may cause high anxiety. To illustrate how high anxiety is a common side effect of the acculturation process. To have participants get in touch with their thoughts/feelings about cross-cultural and bilingual relationships. To illustrate how the topic of cultural and linguistic relations may distort and affect one's ability to communicate in a sincere and accurate manner. To stimulate exploration and discussion about how one's biases and the apprehensions about self-disclosure may affect a cross-cultural and bilingual relationship.

Playing time:
A minimum of 2-3 hours, but longer sessions of up to 6 hours are possible.

Number of players:
At least 12 players, but observing audience may be of any size.

Materials required:
The fishbowl exercise requires an open environment similar to a classroom setting. Freestanding chairs (six or seven) are arranged in a semicircle (the fishbowl) where participants will sit to discuss an issue. A VHS camera, microphone, recording unit, and monitor may be used to record the entire event. Seats are arranged on the outside of the circle for those in attendance to observe the exercise.

Preparation:
The fishbowl technique takes a minimum of 2-3 hours to conduct adequately. Longer periods of time are not unusual, especially when the exercise is used to discuss multiple issues of cultural or linguistic relations and cross-cultural and bilingual communications. It may be used in a classroom situation or an in-service workshop dealing with the side effects of acculturation, crosscultural and bilingual counseling, race relations, intergroup conflicts, or any number of other situations where the intent is to illustrate the nature of feelings, conflicts, and biases in crosscultural and bilingual matters. The usual procedure in conducting the experience is broken down into five progressive stages. Initial preparation for the exercise is minimal except that the facilitator be familiar and conversant with the activity procedure.

Activity Procedure
Stage 1-Obtaining Volunteers and Presenting the Task:
The trainer informs the participants that six or seven volunteers (fishbowl groups) are being asked to undergo an exercise for approximately 20-30 minutes. They are to discuss a topic (How do you feel about cross-cultural and bilingual relationships? Or How have you handled acculturation in Adapted from Derald Wing Sue, California State University, Hayward 2002 Dr. Catherine Collier All Rights Reserved 1

CCDES Activity #2 your own life?) which the trainer does not divulge to them until the exercise begins. This last point is very crucial to the success of the exercise. With some encouragement from the trainer, it is usually possible to find seven willing volunteers. These instructions are given to the group. First, no communication between the volunteers and observers or the trainer is allowed once the experience begins. Second, the group is informed about how much time they will be allowed (e.g., 20 minutes). The trainer will stop the discussion regardless of where the group has advanced. Third, those observing in the audience are instructed to analyze what they see happening in the fishbowl. Not talking by the observers is allowed. Once these instructions are communicated in front of everyone, the topic is presented (How do you feel about cross-cultural and bilingual relationships? Or How have you handled acculturation in your own life?).

Trainer Tips
The content of the topic is never divulged to the audience beforehand. Because the topic can be a threatening one (asking for self-disclosure in front of a group), previous knowledge may affect who volunteers to undergo the experience. Do not be concerned about obtaining an even balance of men and women or different ethnic or cultural volunteers. Who volunteers and how the composition affects the topic and processes is valuable in itself. For example, women are generally more likely to volunteer. What does this mean? Do women find self-disclosure easier than men? Does this hold true for cross-cultural and bilingual topics as well? Furthermore, if the volunteer group has no language minority individuals, does the discussion and extent of self-disclosure differ from that of a group having one or more language minority group members present? Some common process observations include the following.: 1. Once the volunteers are seated and the topic introduced, note the impact it has on group members. It is not uncommon for a long period of silence to ensue, then an attempt to define what cross-cultural and bilingual relationships are or what acculturation is. Participants may show great reluctance to go first and may even prolong the discussion as long a it does no focus on them personally. These may be attempts to deal with the topic intellectually, to guard against disclosing anything about themselves that would label them biased or difficult. Such maneuvers are aimed at self-protection. 2. In general, four different responses (they may be manifested in a number of indirect ways) may occur. First, a declaration in some form that cross-cultural and bilingual relationships are "okay;" second, a declaration that it is "not okay;" third, a refusal to self disclose; and fourth, a statement that a person does not know how he or she feels about cross-cultural and bilingual relationships. For example, a statement that "I feel fine about cross-cultural and bilingual relationships, but I worry about the children" may really be indicative of the person's aversion to it. The ingenuity and skill of the trainer is important in helping participants to identify values and biases. If this exercise is used in teacher training, the discussion might be directed toward how one's feelings and biases might affect a classroom environment with culturally and linguistically diverse students. 3. Watch for distortions of communication. Whenever topics of cultural or linguistic Adapted from Derald Wing Sue, California State University, Hayward 2002 Dr. Catherine Collier All Rights Reserved 2

CCDES Activity #2 matters are presented, many volunteers become anxious and guarded about how they will come across to others. As a result, a feeling-out process occurs (is this a safe environment?). Unfortunately, concern about how one is perceived by others may result in excessive circumlocutions and tangential communications, which actually lead to greater misunderstanding. 4. Be aware that this is a highly stressful activity. People who refuse to disclose their true thoughts and feelings or do so in a highly indirect manner are not bad or wrong. They are exhibiting survival skills. Place your emphasis more on how our society finds cross-cultural and bilingual matters difficult to discuss openly and honestly. 5. Maximum benefit of this exercise occurs by having participants personalize the experience to themselves and extrapolate the implications to their lives and to their work as helping professionals. 6. As a trainer, the more you conduct this exercise, the more you will become proficient in dispensing valuable lessons for the participants. Do not become discouraged by the complexity of all the processes occurring.

Stage 2-Role-Taking:
When the specified time is reached, the fishbowl group is told to stop. Have participants switch seats, moving to their right. They are instructed to become that person. The following instructions may be given. I want all of you now to move to the seat on your right. You will role-play or become that person. Take a few minutes to switch identities. I want you to say, "My name is (person on the right) and this is how I feel about cross-cultural and bilingual relationships. Keep your statements as brief as possible. When ready, I want one of you to begin and then the others will follow, moving from left to rights. Please do not speak to one another. Alright, begin.

Trainer tips
This portion of the exercise is a powerful example of communication distortion and blockage, which may occur with a threatening topic. Many of the participants will misidentify how a person feels about cross-cultural and bilingual relationships for various reasons. First, the person being paraphrased or having his or her feelings reflected may not have self-disclosed. Second, the roleplaying person may have been so wrapped up in his or her own inner turmoil about cultural and linguistic relations that he or she failed to listen to what was explicitly expressed. Third, the other person might have sent unclear or mixed messages to the entire group. In all cases, this is a powerful lesson about how self-disclosure about cross-cultural and bilingual issues affect communication. At times, however, the role-laying person may be startlingly accurate in expressing another's feelings (even if it was never directly expressed in words). In this case, it might have been the nonverbal communication that was being deciphered. Again, this is a lesson that can lead to discussions concerning how one may express bias even when unaware of it or purposefully concealing it. Because education and the learning environment is a world of interpersonal interactions and community, what implications do these two processes have for cross-cultural and bilingual relationships? The educators biases may come through loud and clear to ethnic, cultural or Adapted from Derald Wing Sue, California State University, Hayward 2002 Dr. Catherine Collier All Rights Reserved 3

CCDES Activity #2 linguistic minorities.

Stage 3-Feedback:
When Stage 2 is completed, all volunteers are instructed to leave the fishbowl and take seats with the audience. Then the trainer again asks for seven new volunteers (observer group). They are told to describe and analyze what they saw happening in the fishbowl group. The observer group is informed that using notes is permissible for this portion of the exercise. They are allotted 15 minutes to complete their task.

Trainer Tips
Some differences between the fishbowl and observer groups may be quickly apparent. Although the fishbowl group may have difficulty starting, the observer group will usually move to its discussion and analysis quickly. It can be pointed out to the participants that this may be caused by several factors: The fishbowl group is asked to self-disclose whereas the observer group is asked to talk about others, and the fishbowl group has a threatening topic whereas the observer group has a relatively safe one. Again, this is a good illustration how culture and language related topics may affect group processes. Usually, the observer group members make fairly accurate observations about what they saw happening in the fishbowl. These analyses may cause discomfort in the group being analyzed because observers are often better able to identify the various defenses used by fishbowl group members. Many of these observations involve avoidance and distancing ploys, which they may not have been aware of using. It is important that the trainer be cognizant that some of the analysis may be very valuative, taking on a good/bad dimension. For example, "Jim didn't express how he felt about cross-cultural and bilingual relationships. Every time it was brought up, he changed the topic. He could have been more honest." The trainer needs to address this issue in later discussions. Empathy and understanding is a valuable commodity for participants to develop.

Stage 4-Reaction:
Again, group discussion is halted when the allotted time has expired. The observer group is instructed to leave the semicircle, and the fishbowl group is asked to return. Having listened to an analysis of their behavior, fishbowl group members are given an opportunity to react to any and/or all parts of the analysis. The trainer may choose to limit the time of the discussion or allow the discussion to continue, should it prove fruitful. From Stage 1 to Stage 4, the entire experience may be videotaped.

Trainer Tips
The fishbowl group members are likely to reassemble and respond quickly. They now perceive the observer group as having either misunderstood them or made judgments about their biases. Sometimes a sense of group cohesiveness develops (us vs. them). Communications become clearer, more honest, and more direct. It is important for the trainer to use this opportunity to make group process observations and to help all participants understand what has happened and the meaning it may have for them. Note that the participants who are most upset tend to now communicate more clearly because they feel more identification with their current group (less threat than before). The feeling-out process Adapted from Derald Wing Sue, California State University, Hayward 2002 Dr. Catherine Collier All Rights Reserved 4

CCDES Activity #2 is now minimized.

Stage 5-Open Discussion and Processing:

There is considerable freedom in this last part of the exercise. Usually, the trainer is required not only to skillfully lead a discussion and analysis on the content, but to aid in making process observations. In almost all cases, the fishbowl and observer group members are eager to engage one another. Likewise, those in the audience who did not participate will show similar eagerness. This is especially true when they possess strong emotional reactions and convictions that are elicited during the exercise. In almost all cases, this portion of the exercise can prove invaluable. The trainer may decide to allow a short period of time for debriefing and then to watch all or only selected portions of the videotape if one was made. Use of the videotape allows the audience and trainer to actually observe what went on. Memory distortions caused by faulty recollections or defensiveness are controlled when a tape is observed. Furthermore, the tape can be stopped at crucial periods to make detailed comments, provide feedback to participants, and illustrate the objectives listed above.

Debriefing:
Exchanges can become quite heated and the trainer may want to act as a guide in clarifying or pointing out process. Although this is important to accomplish, it is equally important to try to allow the participants to work it out on their own. If this exercise is being used to illustrate how self-disclosures about cross-cultural and bilingual feelings and convictions affect diverse teaching/learning situations, the trainer can assist the audience in identifying the lessons learned and in applying them directly to the learning environment. Below are some suggestions, but many more are possible as topics of exploration. Remember, the awareness and exploration of these questions have greater meaning when personalized to the above fishbowl exercise. 1. Having gone through this experience, can you understand why cultural and linguistic minority group members may have reluctance to self-disclose their thoughts and feelings to the culturally or linguistically different education professional? Do you perceive this as healthy/unhealthy, and why? 2. Cultural and linguistic minority students and staff may not openly self-disclose to you until they know where you are coming from. They have a healthy suspiciousness of you and are likely to test you through a series of challenges. These challenges are aimed at finding out your beliefs, biases, and attitudes toward cross-cultural and bilingual relationships. The tests may be subtle (in most cases) or quite overt (e.g., how do you feel about cross-cultural and bilingual relationships?) If this was posed to you by a culturally or linguistically different client, what would you say and do? 3. If the counselors have not adequately worked out their own biases and prejudices about cross-cultural and bilingual relationships, how may their discomfort affect the learning environment?

Adapted from Derald Wing Sue, California State University, Hayward 2002 Dr. Catherine Collier All Rights Reserved