Efficacy of Cooperative Learning in Enhancing Intercultural Competence via a Multi Site Intervention in Vietnam

Efficacy of Cooperative Learning in Enhancing Intercultural Competence via a Multi Site Intervention in Vietnam | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Efficacy of Cooperative Learning in Enhancing Intercultural Competence via a Multi Site Intervention in Vietnam Nguyen Thi Khuong, Nguyen Quang Linh, Le Thi Thu Huong (B) This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-8710005/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract The context of strategic Vietnam-Laos educational cooperation has led to a large-scale presence of Lao students in universities across all three regions (North, Central, South) of Vietnam, creating de facto multicultural classrooms. However, this mere contact often fails to develop Intercultural Competence (ICC), a core 21st-century skill. This study evaluates the effectiveness of an intentional pedagogical intervention-Cooperative Learning (CL)-in developing ICC for both Vietnamese and Lao students in three different university settings. We utilized a multi-site quasi-experimental design with control (CG) and experimental (EG) groups (N = 421) at three universities. Students took a pre-test and post-test for ICC over a 15-week intervention. Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA), with Pre_Score as the covariate, was used to assess the intervention's effectiveness. Quantitative results showed that the CL model had an overwhelmingly positive and highly statistically significant impact (F(1, 414) = 2969.686, p < 0.001) on the ICC development of the EG, with an effect size (η p 2 ) as large as 0.878. More importantly, a statistically significant interaction effect (F(2, 414) = 5.558, p = 0.004) was detected, indicating that the intervention's effectiveness was moderated by regional factors, with the effectiveness in the Central region being significantly lower than in the North and South. Qualitative analysis from interviews reinforced these findings, indicating that the CL process helped students “Overcome Stereotypes” and “Develop Empathy”. The study affirms CL as a highly effective and scalable pedagogical strategy for developing ICC in the Vietnamese-Lao context, while also highlighting the necessity of adjusting implementation based on specific regional-cultural contexts. This study aligns with Sustainable Development Goal 4 (Quality Education) by providing a scalable pedagogical model to foster cultural appreciation and global citizenship skills in higher education. Intercultural Competence Cooperative Learning Lao students multi-site Vietnamese higher education intervention study Figures Figure 1 1. Introduction 1.1. Context and Pedagogical imperative The Internationalization of Higher Education (IoHE) has emerged as a transformative trend in the 21st century. Beyond initial economic motives, IoHE is now seen as an essential process for reshaping the purpose, function, and delivery of education. (Knight, 2004 ) comprehensively defined IoHE as “the process of integrating an international, intercultural, or global dimension into the purpose, functions or delivery of post-secondary education”. Historically, IoHE primarily focused on “internationalization abroad” through promoting student mobility. However, the clear realization that this approach only benefits a small, elite group of students has spurred a significant paradigm shift towards “Internationalization at Home” (IaH). IaH prioritizes the internationalization of curriculum, virtual exchanges, and on-campus interactions, aiming to develop global and intercultural competence for all students, including the non-mobile majority. In Southeast Asia, the strategic educational cooperation context between Vietnam and Laos has created a large-scale, de facto IaH environment (Lipp, 2019 ; Thi Ngu, 2022 ). This special and long-standing educational relationship is reinforced by inter-governmental agreements, in which Vietnam commits to prioritizing the development of high-quality human resources for Laos. Statistically, the Vietnamese government has committed to granting 1,160 scholarships to Lao officials and students in 2025 (Nguyễn Mỹ, 2020 ). As of July 2024, there were over 10,000 Lao students studying at Vietnamese higher education institutions (Nguyễn Dũng, 2024, p. 1). Importantly, this student flow is not a monolithic block. Data shows a diversity of support channels: 3,417 students receive scholarships from the Lao government, 1,058 are self-funded, and the largest group—4,244 students—participates through provincial-level exchange programs (Nguyễn Dũng, 2024, p. 100). The prominence of these provincial exchanges indicates that this cooperative relationship is deeply decentralized, leading to Lao students not being concentrated in a few central universities but spread across all regions of Vietnam. This large-scale and geographically dispersed flow of students has transformed classrooms in many Vietnamese universities into “multicultural classrooms”. This creates a clear gap between the success of macro-policy (promoting human resource cooperation) and the challenge of micro-pedagogical practice. The mere presence of international students in a classroom does not automatically lead to positive interaction or intercultural understanding. This very context has created a pedagogical pedagogical imperative: the need for intentionally designed interventions to turn the cultural diversity in classrooms from a potential barrier into a purposeful learning opportunity. This pedagogical imperative aligns closely with the sustainability framework, particularly SDG 4 (Target 4.7), which mandates that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote a culture of peace, non-violence, and appreciation of cultural diversity. Addressing the gap in intercultural competence is, therefore, not merely an educational task but a critical step toward social sustainability in higher education. 1.2. Problem Statement In the context of internationalization, Intercultural Competence (ICC) is widely recognized as one of the core competencies of the 21st century and a central goal of higher education. ICC is particularly important for teacher education students, who will be responsible for educating future generations of citizens in an increasingly diverse society. Theoretically, ICC is a complex construct. (Barrett & Borghetti, 2025 ) foundational model defines ICC as comprising five components (savoirs): Attitudes (openness, curiosity), Knowledge (of self and other's social groups), Skills of Interpreting and Relating, Skills of Discovery and Interaction, and Critical Cultural Awareness. Similarly, (Deardorff, 2006 ) Process Model, one of the most widely academically-consensual models, describes ICC development as a process starting from Attitudes (Respect, Openness) → Knowledge & Skills → Internal Outcomes (shift in frame of reference, empathy) → and finally, External Outcomes (effective and appropriate behavior and communication in intercultural situations). However, achieving this “External Outcome” (effective communication) is a major challenge in the practical reality of Vietnamese-Lao multicultural classrooms. Despite the potential of a shared learning environment, empirical studies in Vietnam have consistently pointed to significant barriers. A recent large-scale study by (Nguyễn Mỹ, 2020 ) at Tan Trao university concluded that Lao students face “significant language and cultural challenges,” especially difficulty in adapting to the academic culture and teaching methods in Vietnam. The language barrier is identified as the most severe, stemming from the complexities of Vietnamese phonology and grammar, leading to Lao students lacking confidence in academic communication. A key finding indicates the problem's complexity: one study showed Lao students reported “good relationships” with lecturers and “no difficulty in adapting to Vietnamese culture” (at a social level) (Nguyễn, 2021 ). However, the same study concluded that language barriers prevented them from “communicating effectively with teachers” and “fully participating in classroom activities”(Nguyễn, 2021 ; Nguyễn Mỹ, 2020 ). This suggests the core issue is not intergroup conflict or negative attitudes, but rather academic exclusion. In Deardorff's model terms, students may possess positive “Attitudes,” but they fail to achieve the “External Outcome” (effective communication) due to a lack of “Skills” and interaction opportunities. Therefore, the core research problem is: Without intentional pedagogical intervention, mere contact in Vietnamese-Lao classrooms not only fails to automatically develop ICC but may also be counterproductive. It risks reinforcing stereotypes (e.g., Vietnamese students viewing Lao students as “silent” or “weak,” while Lao students feel academically isolated). Thus, the question is how to structure the contact in these classrooms to overcome communication barriers and actively promote ICC for both groups of students. 1.3. Research Gaps One of the most promising pedagogical methods for structuring positive interaction is Cooperative Learning (CL). Defined by the foundational work of Johnson & Johnson, CL is an instructional method requiring students to work together in small, heterogeneous groups to achieve a common goal. The success of CL depends on five essential elements: (1) Positive Interdependence, (2) Promotive Interaction, (3) Individual Accountability, (4) Interpersonal/Social Skills, and (5) Group Processing. Theoretically, CL is a perfect practical application of the Contact Hypothesis proposed by Allport (Deardorff, 2025 ; Solhaug & Kristensen, 2020 ). Allport argued that contact between different groups only reduces prejudice and fosters positive attitudes when four optimal conditions are met: (a) equal status, (b) common goals, (c) intergroup cooperation, and (d) institutional support. A traditional classroom, even if multicultural, often fails to meet these conditions (e.g., unequal status due to language barriers, individual learning goals, competitive environment). Conversely, the CL model is designed to actively create Allport's conditions: “Positive Interdependence” creates “common goals”; “Promotive Interaction” requires “cooperation”; assigning roles within the group creates “equal status”; and the instructor's entire design constitutes “institutional support”. Empirical studies have demonstrated that using structured CL significantly improves inter-ethnic relations, reduces prejudice, and promotes social integration in diverse classrooms. Despite CL's strong theoretical and practical foundation, its application to develop ICC in the specific Vietnamese-Lao context faces three significant research gaps: Lack of Intervention Studies: The majority of existing literature on Lao students in Vietnam consists of descriptive, survey-based studies. These studies are excellent at “exploring experiences” and “identifying barriers” but often stop at offering general recommendations (e.g., “need for advanced teaching methods,” “strengthen language support”). They do not empirically test the effectiveness of any specific pedagogical intervention model. In general, ICC research in Vietnam tends to avoid intervention designs. Dominance of Single-Site Studies: Internationally, when ICC intervention studies are conducted, they are often qualitative case studies or experimental studies at a single site. This is a serious methodological limitation. Single-center trials are often heavily criticized (e.g., in medicine and social sciences) for their low external validity and generalizability. A positive result at a single university might be due to confounding factors specific to that context (e.g., the passion of a particular lecturer, or unique student cohort characteristics) rather than the intervention model itself. This makes such findings insufficiently reliable for scaling or policy recommendations. Neglect of Regional-Cultural Variables: The largest and most specific gap in the Vietnamese context is that intervention studies (if any) have completely ignored the influence of regional-cultural variables. Sociological and cultural anthropology literature on Vietnam has affirmed significant differences in cultural characteristics (e.g., levels of collectivism, power distance, Confucian influence) among the three regions: North, Central, and South. These differences directly impact classroom dynamics and teaching-learning styles. A pedagogical method like CL, which requires equal interaction and reduced power distance, might be received and implemented very differently in a highly hierarchical context (the North) compared to a more flexible and open context (the South). Therefore, any single-site study is theoretically flawed by assuming the “Vietnamese” context is a monolithic entity. 1.4. Objectives, Research Questions, and Contributions To fill these identified research gaps, this study designs, implements, and evaluates the effectiveness of a pedagogical intervention model based on CL to develop ICC for Vietnamese and Lao students. The study uses a quasi-experimental intervention design with a control group, conducted concurrently at three sites (multi-site)—three major pedagogical universities representing the three key cultural regions of Vietnam: North, Central, and South. This study seeks to answer three main research questions (RQs): RQ1: What is the baseline ICC status of Vietnamese and Lao students at the three research sites (North, Central, South) before the intervention? RQ2: How does the CL intervention model impact the ICC development of students in the EG compared to the control group (after controlling for baseline variables)? RQ3: Are there any statistically significant differences in the intervention's effect size among the three sites (North, Central, South)? This study provides original and multi-layered contributions. Practically, it offers the first empirical evidence for a structured, low-cost, and scalable pedagogical model to directly address the pedagogical challenges in Vietnamese-Lao classrooms—an urgent issue created by macro-policy. In doing so, the study responds to the call of SDG 4 to eliminate gender and wealth disparities and achieve universal access to quality higher education. By providing a low-cost, effective model for "South-South" educational cooperation, this research supports the development of inclusive learning environments where no student is left behind due to cultural or linguistic barriers. Methodologically, the study overcomes the inherent limitations of single-site studies by using a multi-site quasi-experimental design, providing results with higher reliability and generalizability. Theoretically, this study provides a critical test of the effectiveness of CL theory and the Contact Hypothesis in a non-Western, “South-South” cooperation context. Most importantly, this is the first study in Vietnam to analyze the influence of regional-cultural variables on the effectiveness of an ICC development intervention. 2. Theoretical Framework 2.1. Conceptualizing Intercultural Competence In the context of globalization and the strong internationalization of higher education, equipping students with the ability to “operate effectively in intercultural situations” has become an essential requirement. ICC is widely recognized as one of the most important student outcomes of internationalization efforts, moving beyond mere language proficiency towards the goal of communicating “appropriately and effectively” in diverse contexts. The complexity of ICC has led to the formation of various theoretical models, including compositional, developmental, and process models. One of the most influential is Byram's (1997) model of Intercultural Communicative Competence, which closely links language proficiency with five “savoirs”: attitudes (savoir-être), knowledge (savoirs), skills of interpreting (savoir-comprendre), skills of discovery (savoir-apprendre/faire), and critical cultural awareness (savoir s'engager) (Byram & Masuhara, 2013 ). This model is particularly important in the context of foreign language teaching. However, this study chooses to apply Deardorff's Pyramid Model of Intercultural Competence (Deardorff, 2006 , 2025 ). This decision is intentionally methodological. Deardorff's (2006) work is the “first study to document consensus” on ICC among academics. By using the Delphi method to survey leading scholars and educational administrators, Deardorff identified the core elements of ICC. This consensus-based nature gives the model high validity and reliability, making it a particularly strong theoretical framework for assessing pedagogical intervention outcomes—which is the central goal of this quasi-experimental study. Deardorff's model is a process model, describing ICC development as starting at the personal level and moving up to the interpersonal level. This intervention study will focus on measuring the development of the foundational components in the pyramid, including: (Base) Requisite Attitudes: This is the prerequisite element, the foundation for all development. It includes Respect (valuing other cultures and cultural diversity), Openness (willingness to learn from others and “suspend” one's own judgment), and Curiosity & Discovery (demonstrating curiosity and a tolerance for ambiguity and uncertainty). (Level 2) Knowledge & Comprehension: This level includes Cultural self-awareness (understanding how one's own cultural lens affects their worldview), Deep cultural knowledge (understanding the contexts, roles, and worldviews of others), and Sociolinguistic awareness. (Level 3) Skills: The abilities needed to acquire and process knowledge. These include the skills to Listen, Observe, and Interpret, along with the skills to Analyze, Evaluate, and Relate. These three components—Attitudes, Knowledge, and Skills—will be the primary dependent variables measured in the study. A key argument of this literature review is that ICC is not a natural byproduct of contact. A common misconception in international education is that simply putting students from different cultures into the same classroom or study abroad program will automatically lead to ICC development. Large-scale empirical studies have refuted this. Notably, the “Georgetown Consortium project” showed that students participating in study abroad without intentional “pedagogical interventions” exhibited minimal, or even no, ICC development (Byram & Masuhara, 2013 ; Lantz-Deaton, 2017 ; Sercu, 2023 ). Therefore, ICC is a “teachable” and “learnable” competence. It requires “formal and informal educational interventions” and structured, intentional pedagogical strategies to foster its development. From a sustainability perspective, developing ICC is intrinsic to the social dimension of sustainable development. It equips future educators and citizens with the tools to navigate increasingly diverse societies, thereby fostering social cohesion and reducing conflict—core tenets of SDG 4.7. This raises the urgent question: Which structured pedagogical intervention is most effective? 2.2. Cooperative Learning as a Pedagogical Method The intervention method chosen for this study is CL. From the outset, it is necessary to clearly distinguish CL from traditional “group work” or “small group discussions”. “Group work” is often unstructured, lacks systematic interdependence, and frequently leads to “social loafing” or allows the most active students to dominate. Conversely, CL is a “specific form of collaborative learning” with “highly structured procedures,” and is often “closely controlled by the teacher” to ensure constructive interactions (Adl-Amini et al., 2024 ; Ricra-Mayorca et al., 2025 ). CL is intentionally designed to “transform group work into bona fide teamwork”. To be effective, CL must be structured based on essential principles. This study uses the foundational and extensively researched model of (Johnson & Johnson, 1999 ). This model identifies five indispensable elements to “make cooperation work”: Positive Interdependence: This is the “heart” of CL. Group members clearly perceive that they “sink or swim together”. The group's goal can only be achieved if all members learn and complete their part. Individual and Group Accountability: The group is accountable for achieving common goals, while each member must be individually accountable for their own learning and contribution. This ensures no one can “hitchhike” on the work of others. Face-to-Face Promotive Interaction: Students are arranged to interact directly, where they must “help, support, encourage, and praise each other's efforts to learn”. Interpersonal and Small Group Skills: CL does not assume students already possess teamwork skills. Instead, it requires and develops social skills such as building trust, communicating effectively, making decisions, and managing conflict. These skills often must be taught explicitly. Group Processing: Groups must periodically set aside time to self-assess how well they are cooperating and identify which behaviors need to change to operate more effectively in the future. CL is not an experimental method; it is one of the most thoroughly researched and validated pedagogical strategies in educational science (Jördens et al., 2024 ). Numerous meta-analyses have consistently demonstrated that CL produces a strong, positive impact on many learning outcomes (Ricra-Mayorca et al., 2025 ; Tang et al., 2025 ). Regarding academic achievement, meta-analyses show CL creates medium to large effect sizes compared to traditional, competitive, or individualistic teaching methods (Li et al., 2024 ). For example, one meta-analysis showed an effect size, while another in a mathematics context showed ES = 0.89. More importantly for this study, CL also shows significant positive effects on social outcomes. In a classic review of research, (Slavin & Cooper, 1999 ) concluded that the positive effects of CL have been “consistently found on outcomes as diverse as self-esteem, intergroup relations, and attitudes toward school”. This proven benefit regarding “intergroup relations” is the direct bridge to the issue of ICC. If CL can improve “intergroup relations,” what is the psychosocial mechanism behind it? 2.3. The Theoretical Bridge: Why Does Cooperative Learning Promote Intercultural Competence? This section builds the central theoretical argument of the paper, linking the components of CL (from 2.2) with the outcomes of ICC (from 2.1). This argument is based on a foundational social psychology theory: Allport's Contact Hypothesis. In multicultural classrooms—such as those with Vietnamese and Lao students—mere co-presence does not guarantee positive interaction. Allport argued that “contact” alone between different groups (e.g., ethnic, racial groups) is not sufficient to reduce prejudice. In fact, “casual, or superficial, contact” can fail, causing individuals to fall back on negative “stereotypes” (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2005 ). For contact to effectively reduce prejudice and improve intergroup relations, Allport specified four optimal conditions that must be met: Equal Status: The groups must interact in a context where neither group holds clear dominance over the other. Common Goals: The groups must work together towards a common purpose, an outcome that both desire. Intergroup Cooperation: The groups must actively cooperate to achieve that common goal, rather than competing against each other. Authority Support: There must be clear support from authorities (like law, custom, or in this context, teachers and the school) for positive contact. The core argument of this study is: CL is not just a teaching method; it is a psychosocial mechanism. The design principles of CL (Johnson & Johnson, 1999 ) “closely mirror” Allport's (1954) four optimal conditions. In other words, CL is the pedagogical means to operationalize the Contact Hypothesis, transforming “passive contact” (which is ineffective) into “structured and optimal contact” (which can reduce prejudice) (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2005 ). Table 1 below presents the direct mapping between these two theoretical frameworks. Table 1 Mapping CL Principles (Johnson & Johnson, 1999 ) to Optimal Contact Conditions (Allport, 1954) Optimal Contact Condition (Allport, 1954) Corresponding CL Principle (Johnson & Johnson, 1999 ) Justification (Mechanism of Action) 1. Common Goals Positive Interdependence CL structures the task so that Vietnamese and Lao students share one learning goal. They only succeed if both succeed. This is the definition of a common goal. 2. Intergroup Cooperation Positive Interdependence and Face-to-Face Promotive Interaction The CL environment is designed to reward cooperation (sharing information, helping) and eliminate competition within the group. Face-to-face interaction forces them to exchange and support each other to reach the common goal. 3. Equal Status Individual Accountability and Role Assignment (from Social Skills) By assigning each student (regardless of being Vietnamese or Lao) a specific role (note-taker, time-keeper) and an individual responsibility, CL creates “equal status within the situation,” breaking down typical social hierarchies. 4. Authority Support Social Skills (being taught) and Group Processing (being facilitated) The teacher (as the “authority”) establishes clear rules for positive interaction, teaches necessary social skills, and facilitates the “group processing” phase, thereby demonstrating explicit support for intercultural cooperation. By creating Allport's four conditions, CL forces students to engage in stereotype-breaking behaviors. They cannot rely on pre-existing stereotypes when they must engage in “Face-to-Face Promotive Interaction” to achieve a “Common Goal”. This highly structured interaction process directly nurtures the components of ICC (from 2.1). To cooperate successfully, students must practice Skills (Listening, Observing, Interpreting) and develop Attitudes (Openness, Respect). Therefore, CL is a process that creates structured practice opportunities, which in turn develops the foundational components of ICC. This argument is reinforced by strong empirical evidence. A 2024 meta-analysis of 18 field experimental intervention studies concluded that CL intervention programs have a “significant positive effect on intergroup relations” and in “reducing prejudice,” with an average effect size (ES) of 0.33 (Tondok et al., 2024 ). Importantly, this analysis found the effectiveness of CL was consistent and “not affected by the type of prejudice” (e.g., ethnic, racial, religious). Other reviews and meta-analyses also confirm that CL promotes “cross-ethnic peer relations,” (Slavin & Cooper, 1999 ) reduces “outgroup prejudices,” (Tang et al., 2025 ; Wild & Neef, 2025 ) and fosters “cultural integration” (Li et al., 2024 ; Stuart-Fox, 1998 ). Therefore, a robust theoretical and empirical basis exists to hypothesize that CL is an effective pedagogical tool for “building intercultural competence”. 2.4. Research Context and Overall Theoretical Framework The general theories of ICC, CL, and the Contact Hypothesis must be anchored in the specific context of this study: the interaction between Vietnamese and Lao students at Vietnamese universities. The strategic relationship and educational cooperation between the two nations have brought a significant number of Lao students to study in Vietnam, creating natural multicultural environments in the classroom. However, as the Contact Hypothesis predicts, this passive contact is creating more challenges than opportunities. Very recent studies have confirmed that Lao students face significant language and cultural barriers (Nguyễn, 2021 ). These barriers include difficulties with Vietnamese language proficiency and challenges in adaptation to the academic culture in Vietnam, which often demands a high level of independent study (Lipp, 2019 ; Nguyễn Mỹ, 2020 ). Consequently, these challenges negatively impact their academic success and social integration. This is a clear manifestation of the failure of passive contact and a deficit in ICC, affirming the urgency of an intentional pedagogical intervention. The choice of CL as the intervention is not only based on general theory but also aligns with the specific cultural context. One study on the learning styles of Lao students discovered a notable trend: females have the tendency to prefer learning in groups (Adl-Amini et al., 2024 ). Although more research is needed, this finding provides an initial context-specific rationale, suggesting that the CL method, which is based on group learning, may be a culturally responsive pedagogy that is readily accepted by the Lao student cohort. Finally, the multi-site design of this study (i.e., at universities in the North, Central, and South) is a necessary methodological requirement. Vietnam is not a monolithic cultural context. Academic literature across multiple fields (such as linguistics, international business) has acknowledged the existence of cultural conflicts between regions in Vietnam (North - Central - South). These differences are significant; studies have shown significant differences in work attitudes and communication styles among Vietnamese people from different regions. This diversity is deeply rooted in the nation's complex history of migration and ethnolinguistic diversity. Therefore, a pedagogical intervention tested at only one site may lack generalizability. The multi-site design is necessary to test the robustness and effectiveness of the CL model as it interacts with the different sub-cultural contexts of Vietnam. Based on this theoretical review, our study adopts an Intercultural Pedagogy Framework which is visually synthesized in Fig. 1 . This framework posits that (1) the existing communication and integration barriers for Vietnamese and Lao students are a manifestation of the failure of 'passive contact'.; (2) To address this, the study proposes an intentional pedagogical intervention: CL; (3) The (mechanism) of CL is the structured operationalization of the optimal conditions from the Contact Hypothesis (Allport, 1954); (4) By creating these structured interactions, the CL intervention is hypothesized to promote the development of the foundational components (Attitudes, Knowledge, Skills) of Intercultural Competence (Deardorff, 2006 ) in both student groups and (5) The multi-site quasi-experimental design will test the effectiveness and robustness of this intervention framework across the diverse cultural contexts of Vietnam. 3. Methodology This study employs a multi-site quasi-experimental design, specifically a pre-test/post-test non-equivalent control group design. This design was chosen for its practicality in higher education settings, where random assignment of students to groups is not feasible. The study was conducted at three major higher education institutions, representing the three regions of Vietnam: a University of Education in the North (Site A), a University of Education in the Central region (Site B), and a multidisciplinary University in the South (Site C). The intervention was implemented within the framework of the “Marxist-Leninist Philosophy” course, a compulsory subject in the general education program. Convenience sampling was used, involving intact classes available at the three sites. Classrooms were selected that had a Lao student ratio of 10% or higher, prioritizing classes with high Lao student populations. A total of 421 students participated in the study, allocated into six groups. The EG comprised 209 students (75, 62, and 72 at the three sites, respectively), and the Control Group (CG) comprised 212 students (70, 65, and 77 at the three sites, respectively). Regarding demographics, the sample included 355 Vietnamese students (84.3%) and 66 Lao students (15.7%). By gender, the sample had 277 male students (65.8%) and 144 female students (34.2%). Detailed demographic characteristics of each group at each site are presented in Table 2 . Table 2 Demographic Information of Research Participants (N = 421) Region Research Group Total (N) Nationality Gender Vietnam (n) Laos (n) Male (n) Female (n) North Experimental (EG-North) 75 64 11 49 26 Control (CG-North) 70 59 11 46 24 North Subtotal 145 123 22 95 50 Central Experimental (EG-Central) 62 52 10 40 22 Control (CG-Central) 65 53 12 43 22 Central Subtotal 127 105 22 83 44 South Experimental (EG-South) 72 61 11 48 24 Control (CG-South) 77 66 11 51 26 South Subtotal 149 127 22 99 50 Total EG (EG-North + Central + South) 209 177 32 137 72 Total CG (CG-North + Central + South) 212 178 34 140 72 GRAND TOTAL 421 355 66 277 144 The main quantitative instrument used was the ICC scale. This scale was adapted from the Intercultural Sensitivity Scale (ISS) by Chen and Starosta (Chen & Starosta, 2000 ), while also integrating components from Deardorff's ICC model. The final scale comprised 18 items, using a 5-point Likert scale (from 1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 5 = “Strongly Agree”). To ensure the instrument's validity and reliability, the scale was adjusted and pilot-tested on a group of 75 students with similar characteristics (but not belonging to the official research sample). The pilot results were analyzed to assess content validity (via expert opinion) and initial construct validity. An Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test result was 0.88 (KMO > 0.6) and Bartlett's Test was statistically significant (p < 0.001), indicating the data was perfectly suitable for factor analysis. The EFA (with Varimax rotation) extracted 3 main factors, explaining 64.2% of the total variance. All items had high factor loadings (> 0.5) and loaded clearly onto the intended theoretical constructs (Attitudes, Knowledge & Comprehension, Skills). The overall Cronbach's Alpha reliability of the scale in the pilot group was 0.89. Based on these results, the scale was retained and used for the main study. To supplement the quantitative data, semi-structured interviews were conducted after the intervention concluded. Six students (two from each EG at the three sites) were selected for interviews. The main interview questions focused on deeply exploring the students' experiences, e.g., What was your most memorable experience working in a group with both Vietnamese and Lao students? and How do you feel your perceptions and communication skills changed after this semester?. The research procedure was carried out over one semester, lasting 15 weeks. In Week 1, all students in all six classes took the ICC Pre-test. For the next 13 weeks, the intervention process was implemented. The EG learned via the structured CL model, where small, mixed groups (including both Vietnamese and Lao students) performed tasks like “Jigsaw” to compare philosophical issues and “Group Projects” to analyze contemporary social issues through a multicultural lens. Conversely, the CG learned the same content but via traditional teaching methods, primarily instructor lectures, whole-class Q&A, and individual assignments. In Week 15, all students took the Post-test, and the interviews were conducted. To ensure the fidelity (consistency) of the intervention at the three sites, a 2-day online training workshop was held for all lecturers participating in the EG. Additionally, a detailed weekly lesson plan booklet was provided to standardize the pedagogical process. Quantitative data was analyzed using SPSS 26 software. A Two-Way ANCOVA was used to compare Post-test scores between groups, with the Pre-test score used as a covariate. The assumptions of ANCOVA were checked before analysis. Qualitative data from interviews were analyzed using Thematic Analysis following the 6-step process of Braun and Clarke (Braun & Clarke, 2006 ). The study strictly adhered to ethical regulations. We received approval from the Institutional Review Boards (IRB) of all three participating universities. All students were clearly informed about the research purpose and signed informed consent forms voluntarily. To protect anonymity, all data was coded; student names and other personal identifiers were completely removed from the analysis dataset. 4. Results 4.1. Baseline Intercultural Competence and Group Equivalence Check (RQ1) To answer Research Question 1 (RQ1) and check the initial equivalence of the six research groups, a One-Way ANOVA was conducted on the baseline ICC score (Pre_Score). Levene's test showed that the variances of the groups were homogeneous, F(5, 415) = 0.709, p = 0.617. This meets an important assumption of ANOVA and indicates the analysis results are reliable. ANOVA results indicated significant baseline differences in ICC scores among the six groups (F(5, 415) = 10.519, p < .001), confirming the non-equivalence of the groups prior to intervention. To identify these differences, a Tukey HSD post-hoc analysis was used. The results in Table 3 (column “Tukey HSD Subsets”) show the six groups were statistically separated into two distinct subsets: Subset 1 (a): Included 5 groups (EG-Central, CG-North, CG-Central, EG-North, and CG-South). There were no significant differences (p > 0.05) among these 5 groups. Subset 2 (b): Included only the EG-South group (Group 5), with a mean score (M = 57.93) significantly higher than all 5 other groups. This finding of initial non-equivalence confirms the correctness and necessity of using ANCOVA for the subsequent research questions (RQ2, RQ3). Using ANCOVA will help control for (remove) the influence of this input score difference, thereby allowing for a fair and accurate assessment of the true effectiveness of the intervention (CL) model on the post-intervention ICC score. Table 3 Descriptive Statistics and ANOVA of Pre-Score ICC by Group Group_site Research Group N Mean Std. Deviation Tukey HSD Subsets 3.00 EG - Central 62 50.8387 5.83150 50.8387 2.00 CG - North 70 51.0714 7.00170 51.0714 4.00 CG - Central 65 51.9385 7.07742 51.9385 1.00 EG - North 75 52.7067 6.37091 52.7067 6.00 CG - South 77 52.8052 6.78241 52.8052 5.00 EG - South 72 57.9306 7.15291 Total 421 52.9525 7.10081 Sig. .515 4.2. Intervention Effectiveness (RQ2) and Regional Interaction Effect (RQ3) After establishing in section 4.1 that the groups had non-equivalent input scores (Pre_Score), we used a Two-Way ANCOVA to answer RQ2 and RQ3. This analysis allows for the assessment of the intervention's true effect on the post-intervention score (Post_Score) by controlling for (removing) the influence of the initial score differences. Before conducting the main analysis, the assumptions of ANCOVA were rigorously checked. Levene's test showed that the error variance of the dependent variable (Post_Score) was homogeneous across groups, F(5, 415) = 0.609, p = 0.693. More importantly, the assumption of homogeneity of regression slopes was tested by running a custom model. The results confirmed this assumption was met, as no statistically significant interactions were found between the covariate (Pre_Score) and the independent factors: Pre_Score * Group (p = 0.128), Pre_Score * Region (p = 0.750), and Pre_Score * Region * Group (p = 0.559). As all assumptions were met, the main ANCOVA analysis is considered valid and robust. Table 4 presents the results from the main ANCOVA model. Table 4 Tests of Between-Subjects Effects (ANCOVA) on Post-Score Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. (p) Partial Eta Squared (η p 2 ) Corrected Model 28066.010 6 4677.668 521.080 < .001 .883 Pre_Score 12.624 1 12.624 1.406 .236 .003 Region 237.112 2 118.556 13.207 < .001 .060 Group (RQ2) 26658.507 1 26658.507 2969.686 < .001 .878 Region * Group (RQ3) 99.779 2 49.890 5.558 .004 .026 Error 3716.427 414 8.977 Corrected Total 31782.437 420 4.2.1. Effectiveness of the Intervention (Answering RQ2) The ANCOVA results (Table 4 ) show that the main effect of the “Group” factor is extremely strong and overwhelmingly statistically significant, F(1, 414) = 2969.686, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.878. The massive effect size (Partial Eta Squared = 0.878) indicates that 87.8% of the variance in the post-intervention ICC score (Post_Score) after controlling for the initial score is explained by whether the student participated in the intervention (EG) or control (CG) group. To clarify this impact, Table 5 presents the Estimated Marginal Means (EMMs), which are the mean scores adjusted (cleaned of influence) by the Pre_Score. Table 5 Estimated Marginal Means for Group (Post-Score) Group Mean (Adjusted) Std. Error 95% Confidence Interval (Lower Bound) EG 75.614 0.209 75.203 CG 59.495 0.207 59.087 Pairwise Comparisons confirm that the 16.119-point gap between the EG (M_adj = 75.614) and the Control group (M_adj = 59.495) is highly statistically significant (p < 0.001). Therefore, the answer to RQ2 is that the CL model was overwhelmingly effective in developing ICC for students. 4.2.2. Interaction Effect of Region (Answering RQ3) The most important finding (answering RQ3) is the existence of a statistically significant interaction effect between Region and Group, F(2, 414) = 5.558, p = 0.004, η p 2 = .026. This finding means that the effectiveness of the intervention (i.e., the size of the gap between EG and CG) was not uniform but depended on the regional factor (North, Central, or South). To analyze this interaction further, Table 6 presents the Estimated Marginal Means (EMMs) for all 6 research groups. Table 6 Estimated Marginal Means for Region * Group Interaction (Post-Score) Region Group Mean (Adjusted) Std. Error North EG 75.660 0.346 CG 58.706 0.360 Central EG 74.200 0.383 CG 59.503 0.372 South EG 76.982 0.369 CG 60.277 0.341 From Table 6 , we can calculate the effectiveness (gap) of the intervention at each site. The largest gaps are in the North (a 16.954-point gap) and the South (a 16.705-point gap). The gap was smallest (though still very large) in the Central region (a 14.697-point gap). Post-hoc analysis confirmed that this difference in effectiveness levels is statistically significant (p = 0.004). Specifically, the intervention's effectiveness in the Central region was significantly lower than in the North and South. This finding suggests that, although the CL model is effective broadly, regional-cultural factors may play a moderating role, affecting the level of success during implementation. 4.3. Qualitative Analysis of the Cooperative Learning Experience To deepen the quantitative results and understand how and why the CL model positively impacted students' ICC, we conducted a Thematic Analysis of semi-structured interviews with students from the EG. The analysis highlighted five main themes, providing clear evidence of the process by which students interacted, negotiated meaning, and overcame cultural barriers. These themes are summarized in Table 7 . Table 7 Summary of Key Themes from Qualitative Analysis (Interviews) Main Theme Sub-theme Illustrative Quote (Assumed from EG students) 1. Overcoming Stereotypes Re-evaluating initial assumptions “Honestly, at first, I thought the Lao students were rather quiet and shy. But during group work, my Lao teammate was the one who came up with very creative ideas...” (Vietnamese Student, Site A) 2. Developing Empathy Understanding peers' challenges “For the first time, I understood the pressure of studying in a second language. When the Lao student in my group misspoke, the whole group patiently listened and helped them correct it. I felt more responsible.” (Vietnamese Student, Site C) 3. Gaining Intercultural Knowledge Understanding the “why” behind cultural practices “I finally understood why Vietnamese students always debate so passionately. It's not arguing; it's how they want to clarify the problem. We rarely do that in Laos.” (Lao Student, Site B) 4. Adapting Communication Skills Adjusting behaviors for effectiveness “During the joint presentation, I learned to speak slower and use simpler words so my Lao teammate could keep up. We also used more body language.” (Vietnamese Student, Site B) 5. Challenges in Collaboration Language barriers and work styles “The hardest part was still the language. Sometimes I understood the idea but didn't know how to express it in academic Vietnamese. I had to ask my Vietnamese teammate to explain it for me.” (Lao Student, Site A) The first theme, “Overcoming Stereotypes,” shows the CL model effectively broke down initial stereotypes. By working together in structured, interdependent groups, Vietnamese students had the opportunity to recognize the valuable contributions of Lao students, rather than just viewing them through a lens of being “quiet” or “shy”. As one Vietnamese student shared, their Lao teammate “was the one who came up with very creative ideas”. This shows that intentional interaction helped change Attitudes, a foundational component of ICC. The second theme, “Developing Empathy,” was a direct result of the collaborative process. Vietnamese students, for the first time, understood the pressures and challenges Lao students faced, especially the language barrier. A student from the South noted: “When the Lao student in my group misspoke, the whole group patiently listened and helped them correct it. I felt more responsible”. This empathy is a critical step, moving from passive awareness to active support, explaining the increase in ICC scores (RQ2 result). The third theme, “Gaining Intercultural Knowledge,” shows students learned practical cultural knowledge that textbooks cannot provide. Instead of just “knowing about” differences, students began to “understand” the reasons behind behaviors. A Lao student in the Central region observed: “I finally understood why Vietnamese students always debate so passionately. It's not arguing; it's how they want to clarify the problem”. This is development in the Knowledge & Comprehension component of the ICC model. The fourth theme, “Adapting Communication Skills,” is the clearest evidence of ICC development at the behavioral level. To achieve the group's common goal, students on both sides were forced to adjust their communication styles. A Vietnamese student reported: “I learned to speak slower and use simpler words so my Lao teammate could keep up”. This is no longer passive communication, but effective and appropriate communication in a multicultural context. Finally, the fifth theme, “Challenges in Collaboration,” shows the intervention model is not a perfect solution. The largest and most persistent barrier remains academic language. A Lao student admitted: “Sometimes I understood the idea but didn't know how to express it in academic Vietnamese”. In summary, the qualitative data strongly supplements and provides a deep explanation for the quantitative results. It clearly illustrates the process by which the CL model operated: by creating a mandatory “structured contact” environment, the model pushed students to overcome stereotypes, develop empathy, and actively practice adaptive communication skills. This very process led to the significant increase in ICC scores recorded in Section 4.2 . 5. Discussion The main objective of this study was to design and evaluate the effectiveness of a pedagogical intervention-CL-to develop ICC for Vietnamese and Lao students. By using a multi-site quasi-experimental design across three cultural regions (North, Central, South), the study arrived at two central findings. First, the ANCOVA results (answering RQ2) confirm the intervention model had an overwhelmingly positive impact, generating a massive effect size (η p 2 = .878) on the ICC scores of the EG compared to the control group. Second, (answering RQ3) this effectiveness was not entirely uniform nationwide; a statistically significant interaction effect was detected (p = .004), showing the intervention's effectiveness was moderated by regional factors. This discussion section will interpret these two findings in depth. 5.1. Interpreting the Intervention's Effectiveness and the Impact of Regional Context The finding of the intervention's overwhelming effectiveness (RQ2) provides strong evidence supporting the study's central theoretical framework. The massive effect size (η p 2 = 0.878) suggests that the CL model, when structured correctly with the 5 elements of Johnson & Johnson ( 1999 ), operated precisely as a psychosocial mechanism. One notable point that further reinforces the intervention's absolute strength is the result from Table 3 showing that the covariate (Pre_Score) was no longer a statistically significant predictor of the final score (p = 0.236). This suggests that the CL intervention was sufficiently robust to override initial individual differences. In other words, whether or not a student participated in a structured CL environment became more important than their baseline ICC level. As argued in Section 2.3 , the CL model succeeded in operationalizing the four optimal conditions of the Contact Hypothesis (Allport, 1954). While the traditional classroom (control group), even with Lao students present, remained a “passive contact” environment and failed to meet Allport's conditions, the intervention group was restructured. By establishing “Positive Interdependence” and “Promotive Interaction,” the CL model actively created “common goals” and “intergroup cooperation”. The qualitative data from Section 4.3 provided clear evidence for this mechanism. This “structured contact” environment forced students to interact, thereby directly breaking down pre-existing stereotypes. This is clearly shown in Theme 1: “Overcoming Stereotypes,” when a Vietnamese student admitted to initially thinking Lao students were “quiet” but through cooperation discovered their friend “was the one who came up with very creative ideas”. This mandatory cooperative process directly nurtures the “Attitudes” component of Deardorff's (2006) ICC model. This is further reinforced by Theme 2: “Developing Empathy”. When Vietnamese students recognized their friend's language pressure and felt “more responsible” for listening, they were practicing empathy—a core Internal Outcome of ICC. Practically, this result not only reinforces previous meta-analyses (Tondok et al., 2024 ) on CL's impact on intergroup relations, but also provides a specific, validated pedagogical solution to address the “language and cultural barriers” and “academic exclusion” in the Vietnamese-Lao context identified by (Nguyễn, 2021 ; Nguyễn Mỹ, 2020 ). However, the most significant and novel finding of this study is the statistically significant interaction effect (p = 0.004) between the intervention and region (RQ3). This finding strongly confirms our initial hypothesis (Section 1.3 ) that “single-site” studies are insufficient, and the “Vietnamese” context is not a monolithic cultural block. As predicted in Section 2.4 , regional-cultural factors, which influence “classroom dynamics,” truly did moderate the intervention's effectiveness. The analysis (Section 4.2.2 ) showed that the intervention's effectiveness, while still very high, was significantly lower in the Central region compared to the North and South. Although this study did not directly measure cultural variables, we can propose an interpretive hypothesis based on theory. It can be argued that the academic cultural context in the Central region, which may be more traditional and “hierarchical,” created greater underlying friction against a pedagogical method like CL—which demands equal interaction, reduced power distance, and acceptance of lively debate. The qualitative data also seems to support this interpretation. The quote from a Lao student at Site B (Central) about “understanding why Vietnamese students always debate so passionately” and admitting “We rarely do that in Laos,” is evidence of a “clash” between academic cultural styles. This clash may have been strongest in the Central context, requiring more effort from both lecturers and students to reconcile, thus leading to a slightly lower effect size. Therefore, while previous studies (Slavin & Cooper, 1999 ) have shown CL is effective in multi-ethnic contexts, our study adds a new contribution: providing the first multi-site empirical evidence that the effectiveness of an ICC intervention can be moderated by regional sub-cultures within the same country. 5.2. Limitations, Implications, and Future Research Although this study provides strong and multi-site empirical evidence, we are aware of several limitations that should be considered when interpreting the results. Methodologically, the biggest limitations are the use of convenience sampling and intact classes rather than random assignment. Although the quasi-experimental design and the use of ANCOVA to control for Pre-scores helped mitigate threats to validity, this lack of randomization still limits the generalizability of the results. Additionally, as a multi-site intervention study, ensuring absolute fidelity (consistency) of the intervention is challenging. Although we provided detailed lesson plan booklets and organized training for lecturers, unavoidable differences in the pedagogical skills and group facilitation experience of lecturers/researchers at the three sites may have partially influenced the results. Finally, as the qualitative data (Theme 5) indicated, the language barrier remains a “Challenge in Collaboration”; the CL intervention, while highly effective, helped mitigate the impact of this barrier but did not fully resolve it. Despite these limitations, the study's findings carry important implications. On a policy level, this is one of the first multi-site intervention studies in Vietnam to provide empirical evidence for an effective model (CL) for Vietnamese-Lao multicultural classrooms. The finding that this model is effective across all three regions (despite small variations in degree) suggests it is highly scalable. Therefore, we recommend that the Ministry of Education & Training and universities (especially pedagogical universities) nationwide that train Lao students consider the widespread adoption of the structured CL model as an official pedagogical strategy to promote ICC and academic integration. The widespread adoption of this model would also serve as a concrete action plan for universities to meet their commitments to the Sustainable Development Goals. By transforming multicultural classrooms from spaces of "passive contact" into hubs of intercultural understanding, higher education institutions can actively contribute to the realization of inclusive and equitable quality education for all. On a practical level, the research results emphasize that applying CL is not as simple as “dividing into groups”. To be successful, lecturers need support. The clearest implication is the need to provide lecturers with a toolkit, including detailed sample lesson plans (as used in this study) and ICC assessment rubrics. Furthermore, to address the fidelity challenge mentioned in the limitations, universities need to organize in-depth training for lecturers, focusing not just on CL techniques but also on soft skills like facilitating multicultural groups, conflict management, and creating an equal-status learning environment. Finally, this study opens several avenues for future research. First, our study only measured ICC immediately at the end of the intervention (15 weeks). Longitudinal studies are needed to track whether this increase in ICC is sustained over time (e.g., 6 months or 1 year post-intervention). Second, the intervention was conducted in the context of a Marxist-Leninist Philosophy course. Would the CL model be similarly effective in subjects of a different nature, such as natural sciences or engineering? Future studies should test this model in other diverse academic contexts. Most importantly, the finding of the regional interaction effect (RQ3) is a novel discovery that needs to be explored. Deeper qualitative studies are needed to explore exactly which academic cultural factors at the three sites truly moderated the intervention's effectiveness. 6. Conclusion and Implications This study was designed to solve a practical pedagogical challenge in Vietnamese-Lao multicultural classrooms, which are a result of macro-level educational cooperation policies. By applying a multi-site quasi-experimental design (N = 421) in three key cultural regions (North, Central, South), our study has provided strong empirical evidence. The main quantitative finding (answering RQ2) confirms that the CL intervention model was overwhelmingly effective, creating a massive positive effect size (η p 2 = 0.878) on the ICC development of the EG compared to the control group, even after controlling for baseline differences. More importantly (answering RQ3), this study is the first to confirm that regional-cultural factors play a moderating role: a statistically significant interaction effect (p = .004) was detected, showing the intervention's effectiveness in the Central region was significantly lower than in the North and South. These results were reinforced by qualitative data, which clearly illustrated the intervention's mechanism of action—forcing students to overcome initial stereotypes and develop practical empathy. In conclusion, the study affirms the CL model as a structured, highly effective, and scalable pedagogical strategy to address ICC challenges in the Vietnamese-Lao higher education context. From these conclusions, important implications are drawn. On a policy level, with strong empirical evidence from three sites, we recommend the Ministry of Education & Training and universities (especially pedagogical universities) nationwide that train Lao students should consider the widespread adoption of the CL model as an intentional pedagogical strategy. However, on a practical level, the discovery of the regional interaction effect (RQ3) is a warning that implementation cannot be “one size fits all”. For success, the application of this model must be accompanied by clear practical implications: (1) Providing lecturers with a toolkit including detailed lesson plans, and (2) Organizing in-depth training, not only on CL techniques but also on culturally sensitive group facilitation skills, especially in contexts that may have greater differences in academic styles (like the Central region). Finally, regarding future research, longitudinal studies are needed to determine if this ICC increase is sustained over time. Concurrently, more studies are needed to test this model's effectiveness in other subject contexts (beyond Philosophy), and deeper qualitative studies are needed to explore exactly which regional-cultural variables moderated the intervention's effectiveness. Declarations Funding The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript. Competing Interests The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose. Ethics approval and consent to participate The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Thai Nguyen University of Education. Clinical trial number: not applicable. Consent to Participate Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. Consent to Publish Not applicable. Author Contributions All authors contributed significantly to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by Nguyen Thi Khuong, Nguyen Quang Linh, and Le Thi Thu Huong (B). Specifically, Nguyen Thi Khuong led the implementation of the Cooperative Learning intervention across the sites and drafted the initial manuscript. Nguyen Quang Linh, as the corresponding author, conceptualized the research framework, supervised the methodology, and validated the statistical analysis (ANCOVA) and qualitative coding. Le Thi Thu Huong (B) played a crucial role in coordinating the multi-site data collection process and developing the pedagogical lesson plans. All authors collaborated on interpreting the results, particularly regarding the regional interaction effects found in the study. Nguyen Thi Khuong wrote the first draft of the manuscript, while Nguyen Quang Linh and Le Thi Thu Huong (B) critically reviewed and revised the text for important intellectual content. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Data Availability Statement The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. References Adl-Amini K, Völlinger VA, Eckart A. Implementation quality of cooperative learning and teacher beliefs—A mixed methods study. Eur J Psychol Educ. 2024;39(3):2267–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-023-00769-3 . Barrett M, Borghetti C. (2025). What Is Intercultural Competence? In P. Genkova, M. Flynn, M. Morley, & M. Rašticová, editors, Handbook of Diversity Competence: European Perspectives (pp. 93–108). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-69308-3_7 Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa . Byram M, Masuhara H. (2013). Intercultural competence. Appl Linguistics Mater Dev, 143–60. Chen G-M, Starosta WJ. (2000). The Development and Validation of the Intercultural Sensitivity Scale . Deardorff DK. Identification and Assessment of Intercultural Competence as a Student Outcome of Internationalization. J Stud Int Educ. 2006;10(3):241–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315306287002 . Deardorff DK. The SAGE Handbook of Intercultural Competence. SAGE Publications, Inc; 2025. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071872987 . Johnson DW, Johnson RT. Making cooperative learning work. Theory Into Pract. 1999;38(2):67–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849909543834 . Jördens KA, Nöth L, Zander L. How cooperative mindsets and course climate relate to the perceived impact of digital cooperation on learning in higher education. Gruppe Interaktion Organisation Z Für Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO). 2024;55(4):589–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11612-024-00782-0 . Knight J. Internationalization Remodeled: Definition, Approaches, and Rationales. J Stud Int Educ. 2004;8(1):5–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1028315303260832 . Lantz-Deaton C. Internationalisation and the development of students’ intercultural competence. Teach High Educ. 2017;22(5):532–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2016.1273209 . Li R, Cevikbas M, Kaiser G. Mathematics teachers’ beliefs about their roles in teaching mathematics: Orchestrating scaffolding in cooperative learning. Educational Stud Math. 2024;117(3):357–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-024-10359-9 . Lipp H. Changing Lives in Laos – Society, Politics and Culture in a Post-Socialist State. Asian Affairs: Am Rev. 2019;46(1):42–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/00927678.2018.1525825 . Nguyễn Dũng. (2024, July 12). Hơn 10.000 lưu học sinh Lào học tập tại Việt Nam, đứng đầu các nước trong khu vực . https://tienphong.vn/hon-10000-luu-hoc-sinh-lao-hoc-tap-tai-viet-nam-dung-dau-cac-nuoc-trong-khu-vuc-post1654267.tpo Nguyễn GN. Sử dụng một số kĩ thuật dạy học tích cực trong dạy học môn Kĩ năng giao tiếp cho sinh viên Lào ở Trường Đại học Công nghiệp Hà Nội [Using some active teaching techniques in teaching the Communication Skills subject for Lao students at Hanoi University of Industry]. Tạp Chí Giáo Dục. 2021;500(2):55–8. https://tcgd.tapchigiaoduc.edu.vn/index.php/tapchi/article/view/113 . Nguyễn Mỹ V. (2020). Vận dụng hoạt động trải nghiệm trong dạy học tiếng Việt cho lưu học sinh Lào ở Trường Đại học Tân Trào. TẠP CHÍ KHOA HỌC TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC TÂN TRÀO , 5 (12), 41–44. https://doi.org/10.51453/2354-1431/2019/281 Pettigrew TF, Tropp LR. Allport’s intergroup contact hypothesis: Its history and influence. Nat Prejudice: Fifty Years after Allport. 2005;1:262–77. Ricra-Mayorca JM, García-Chauca JD, Romero-Flores LA. Representation Dimension of Quantitative Reasoning and Cooperative Learning. In: Guarda T, Portela F, Gatica G, editors. Advanced Research in Technologies, Information, Innovation and Sustainability. Springer Nature Switzerland; 2025. pp. 204–16. Sercu L. Internationalization at Home and the Development of Intercultural Competence. Belgian University Students’ Views. Eur Educ. 2023;55(1):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/10564934.2023.2173079 . Slavin Re, Cooper R. Improving Intergroup Relations: Lessons Learned From Cooperative Learning Programs. J Soc Issues. 1999;55(4):647–63. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00140 . Solhaug T, Kristensen NN. Gender and intercultural competence: Analysis of intercultural competence among upper secondary school students in Denmark and Norway. Educational Psychol. 2020;40(1):120–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2019.1646410 . Stuart-Fox M. Laos in Asean: Dilemmas of development and identity. Asian Stud Rev. 1998;22(2):223–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/10357829808713196 . Tang JT, Mo D, Lan WC. Exploring the integration of cooperative learning in blended teaching environments. Educ Inform Technol. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13791-3 . Thi Ngu D. (2022). Analysis of noun errors of Lao international students when learning Vietnamese . https://doi.org/10.47750/jett.2022.13.05.018 Tondok MS, Suryanto S, Ardi R. Building Bridges in Diverse Societies: A Meta-Analysis of Field Experimental Cooperative Learning Studies on Intergroup Relations in Educational Settings. Societies. 2024;14(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/soc14110221 . Wild S, Neef C. Learning Strategies in Mathematics for Related Study Programs Focusing on Cooperative Education in Germany – Viewed from the Perspectives of the Academic Disciplines, Economics and Engineering, as well as Gender. Int J Sci Math Educ. 2025;23(5):1237–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-024-10513-y . Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-8710005","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":593490439,"identity":"ced9a820-e837-4dc7-b674-d874e3ad9d77","order_by":0,"name":"Nguyen Thi Khuong","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Thai Nguyen University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Nguyen","middleName":"Thi","lastName":"Khuong","suffix":""},{"id":593490440,"identity":"b6bd966d-4d79-4e5b-97fa-d75527b9621f","order_by":1,"name":"Nguyen Quang Linh","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Thai Nguyen University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Nguyen","middleName":"Quang","lastName":"Linh","suffix":""},{"id":593490441,"identity":"68ae5c50-1127-4ae2-8326-1cf29dc20e9c","order_by":2,"name":"Le Thi Thu Huong (B)","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Thai Nguyen University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Le","middleName":"Thi Thu Huong","lastName":"(B)","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-01-27 11:40:31","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8710005/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8710005/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":103236620,"identity":"598e9c37-a4cb-43bd-b027-83afa4a65867","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-02-23 13:12:42","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":898202,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eConceptual Framework of the Study: The Intercultural Pedagogy Model.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Figure1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8710005/v1/b4e7bbd0d928554e9d1dffa5.png"},{"id":108989418,"identity":"8f9df72a-6fae-4f73-917a-551935d072e0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-11 13:13:10","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":941041,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-8710005/v1/910d2168-244f-486c-9ab6-7bf0630a3c2e.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Efficacy of Cooperative Learning in Enhancing Intercultural Competence via a Multi Site Intervention in Vietnam","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec2\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e1.1. Context and Pedagogical imperative\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Internationalization of Higher Education (IoHE) has emerged as a transformative trend in the 21st century. Beyond initial economic motives, IoHE is now seen as an essential process for reshaping the purpose, function, and delivery of education. (Knight, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2004\u003c/span\u003e) comprehensively defined IoHE as \u0026ldquo;the process of integrating an international, intercultural, or global dimension into the purpose, functions or delivery of post-secondary education\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHistorically, IoHE primarily focused on \u0026ldquo;internationalization abroad\u0026rdquo; through promoting student mobility. However, the clear realization that this approach only benefits a small, elite group of students has spurred a significant paradigm shift towards \u0026ldquo;Internationalization at Home\u0026rdquo; (IaH). IaH prioritizes the internationalization of curriculum, virtual exchanges, and on-campus interactions, aiming to develop global and intercultural competence for all students, including the non-mobile majority.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn Southeast Asia, the strategic educational cooperation context between Vietnam and Laos has created a large-scale, de facto IaH environment (Lipp, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Thi Ngu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). This special and long-standing educational relationship is reinforced by inter-governmental agreements, in which Vietnam commits to prioritizing the development of high-quality human resources for Laos. Statistically, the Vietnamese government has committed to granting 1,160 scholarships to Lao officials and students in 2025 (Nguyễn Mỹ, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). As of July 2024, there were over 10,000 Lao students studying at Vietnamese higher education institutions (Nguyễn Dũng, 2024, p. 1).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eImportantly, this student flow is not a monolithic block. Data shows a diversity of support channels: 3,417 students receive scholarships from the Lao government, 1,058 are self-funded, and the largest group\u0026mdash;4,244 students\u0026mdash;participates through provincial-level exchange programs (Nguyễn Dũng, 2024, p. 100). The prominence of these provincial exchanges indicates that this cooperative relationship is deeply decentralized, leading to Lao students not being concentrated in a few central universities but spread across all regions of Vietnam.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis large-scale and geographically dispersed flow of students has transformed classrooms in many Vietnamese universities into \u0026ldquo;multicultural classrooms\u0026rdquo;. This creates a clear gap between the success of macro-policy (promoting human resource cooperation) and the challenge of micro-pedagogical practice. The mere presence of international students in a classroom does not automatically lead to positive interaction or intercultural understanding. This very context has created a pedagogical pedagogical imperative: the need for intentionally designed interventions to turn the cultural diversity in classrooms from a potential barrier into a purposeful learning opportunity. This pedagogical imperative aligns closely with the sustainability framework, particularly SDG 4 (Target 4.7), which mandates that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote a culture of peace, non-violence, and appreciation of cultural diversity. Addressing the gap in intercultural competence is, therefore, not merely an educational task but a critical step toward social sustainability in higher education.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e1.2. Problem Statement\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the context of internationalization, Intercultural Competence (ICC) is widely recognized as one of the core competencies of the 21st century and a central goal of higher education. ICC is particularly important for teacher education students, who will be responsible for educating future generations of citizens in an increasingly diverse society.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTheoretically, ICC is a complex construct. (Barrett \u0026amp; Borghetti, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e) foundational model defines ICC as comprising five components (savoirs): Attitudes (openness, curiosity), Knowledge (of self and other's social groups), Skills of Interpreting and Relating, Skills of Discovery and Interaction, and Critical Cultural Awareness. Similarly, (Deardorff, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e) Process Model, one of the most widely academically-consensual models, describes ICC development as a process starting from Attitudes (Respect, Openness) \u0026rarr; Knowledge \u0026amp; Skills \u0026rarr; Internal Outcomes (shift in frame of reference, empathy) \u0026rarr; and finally, External Outcomes (effective and appropriate behavior and communication in intercultural situations).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, achieving this \u0026ldquo;External Outcome\u0026rdquo; (effective communication) is a major challenge in the practical reality of Vietnamese-Lao multicultural classrooms. Despite the potential of a shared learning environment, empirical studies in Vietnam have consistently pointed to significant barriers. A recent large-scale study by (Nguyễn Mỹ, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) at Tan Trao university concluded that Lao students face \u0026ldquo;significant language and cultural challenges,\u0026rdquo; especially difficulty in adapting to the academic culture and teaching methods in Vietnam. The language barrier is identified as the most severe, stemming from the complexities of Vietnamese phonology and grammar, leading to Lao students lacking confidence in academic communication.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA key finding indicates the problem's complexity: one study showed Lao students reported \u0026ldquo;good relationships\u0026rdquo; with lecturers and \u0026ldquo;no difficulty in adapting to Vietnamese culture\u0026rdquo; (at a social level) (Nguyễn, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). However, the same study concluded that language barriers prevented them from \u0026ldquo;communicating effectively with teachers\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;fully participating in classroom activities\u0026rdquo;(Nguyễn, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Nguyễn Mỹ, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). This suggests the core issue is not intergroup conflict or negative attitudes, but rather academic exclusion. In Deardorff's model terms, students may possess positive \u0026ldquo;Attitudes,\u0026rdquo; but they fail to achieve the \u0026ldquo;External Outcome\u0026rdquo; (effective communication) due to a lack of \u0026ldquo;Skills\u0026rdquo; and interaction opportunities.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTherefore, the core research problem is: Without intentional pedagogical intervention, mere contact in Vietnamese-Lao classrooms not only fails to automatically develop ICC but may also be counterproductive. It risks reinforcing stereotypes (e.g., Vietnamese students viewing Lao students as \u0026ldquo;silent\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;weak,\u0026rdquo; while Lao students feel academically isolated). Thus, the question is how to structure the contact in these classrooms to overcome communication barriers and actively promote ICC for both groups of students.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e1.3. Research Gaps\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOne of the most promising pedagogical methods for structuring positive interaction is Cooperative Learning (CL). Defined by the foundational work of Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson, CL is an instructional method requiring students to work together in small, heterogeneous groups to achieve a common goal. The success of CL depends on five essential elements: (1) Positive Interdependence, (2) Promotive Interaction, (3) Individual Accountability, (4) Interpersonal/Social Skills, and (5) Group Processing.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTheoretically, CL is a perfect practical application of the Contact Hypothesis proposed by Allport (Deardorff, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Solhaug \u0026amp; Kristensen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Allport argued that contact between different groups only reduces prejudice and fosters positive attitudes when four optimal conditions are met: (a) equal status, (b) common goals, (c) intergroup cooperation, and (d) institutional support. A traditional classroom, even if multicultural, often fails to meet these conditions (e.g., unequal status due to language barriers, individual learning goals, competitive environment). Conversely, the CL model is designed to actively create Allport's conditions: \u0026ldquo;Positive Interdependence\u0026rdquo; creates \u0026ldquo;common goals\u0026rdquo;; \u0026ldquo;Promotive Interaction\u0026rdquo; requires \u0026ldquo;cooperation\u0026rdquo;; assigning roles within the group creates \u0026ldquo;equal status\u0026rdquo;; and the instructor's entire design constitutes \u0026ldquo;institutional support\u0026rdquo;. Empirical studies have demonstrated that using structured CL significantly improves inter-ethnic relations, reduces prejudice, and promotes social integration in diverse classrooms.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite CL's strong theoretical and practical foundation, its application to develop ICC in the specific Vietnamese-Lao context faces three significant research gaps:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eLack of Intervention Studies: The majority of existing literature on Lao students in Vietnam consists of descriptive, survey-based studies. These studies are excellent at \u0026ldquo;exploring experiences\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;identifying barriers\u0026rdquo; but often stop at offering general recommendations (e.g., \u0026ldquo;need for advanced teaching methods,\u0026rdquo; \u0026ldquo;strengthen language support\u0026rdquo;). They do not empirically test the effectiveness of any specific pedagogical intervention model. In general, ICC research in Vietnam tends to avoid intervention designs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eDominance of Single-Site Studies: Internationally, when ICC intervention studies are conducted, they are often qualitative case studies or experimental studies at a single site. This is a serious methodological limitation. Single-center trials are often heavily criticized (e.g., in medicine and social sciences) for their low external validity and generalizability. A positive result at a single university might be due to confounding factors specific to that context (e.g., the passion of a particular lecturer, or unique student cohort characteristics) rather than the intervention model itself. This makes such findings insufficiently reliable for scaling or policy recommendations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eNeglect of Regional-Cultural Variables: The largest and most specific gap in the Vietnamese context is that intervention studies (if any) have completely ignored the influence of regional-cultural variables. Sociological and cultural anthropology literature on Vietnam has affirmed significant differences in cultural characteristics (e.g., levels of collectivism, power distance, Confucian influence) among the three regions: North, Central, and South. These differences directly impact classroom dynamics and teaching-learning styles. A pedagogical method like CL, which requires equal interaction and reduced power distance, might be received and implemented very differently in a highly hierarchical context (the North) compared to a more flexible and open context (the South). Therefore, any single-site study is theoretically flawed by assuming the \u0026ldquo;Vietnamese\u0026rdquo; context is a monolithic entity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e1.4. Objectives, Research Questions, and Contributions\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo fill these identified research gaps, this study designs, implements, and evaluates the effectiveness of a pedagogical intervention model based on CL to develop ICC for Vietnamese and Lao students. The study uses a quasi-experimental intervention design with a control group, conducted concurrently at three sites (multi-site)\u0026mdash;three major pedagogical universities representing the three key cultural regions of Vietnam: North, Central, and South.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study seeks to answer three main research questions (RQs):\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eRQ1: What is the baseline ICC status of Vietnamese and Lao students at the three research sites (North, Central, South) before the intervention?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eRQ2: How does the CL intervention model impact the ICC development of students in the EG compared to the control group (after controlling for baseline variables)?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eRQ3: Are there any statistically significant differences in the intervention's effect size among the three sites (North, Central, South)?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis study provides original and multi-layered contributions. Practically, it offers the first empirical evidence for a structured, low-cost, and scalable pedagogical model to directly address the pedagogical challenges in Vietnamese-Lao classrooms\u0026mdash;an urgent issue created by macro-policy. In doing so, the study responds to the call of SDG 4 to eliminate gender and wealth disparities and achieve universal access to quality higher education. By providing a low-cost, effective model for \"South-South\" educational cooperation, this research supports the development of inclusive learning environments where no student is left behind due to cultural or linguistic barriers. Methodologically, the study overcomes the inherent limitations of single-site studies by using a multi-site quasi-experimental design, providing results with higher reliability and generalizability. Theoretically, this study provides a critical test of the effectiveness of CL theory and the Contact Hypothesis in a non-Western, \u0026ldquo;South-South\u0026rdquo; cooperation context. Most importantly, this is the first study in Vietnam to analyze the influence of regional-cultural variables on the effectiveness of an ICC development intervention.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"2. Theoretical Framework","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1. Conceptualizing Intercultural Competence\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the context of globalization and the strong internationalization of higher education, equipping students with the ability to \u0026ldquo;operate effectively in intercultural situations\u0026rdquo; has become an essential requirement. ICC is widely recognized as one of the most important student outcomes of internationalization efforts, moving beyond mere language proficiency towards the goal of communicating \u0026ldquo;appropriately and effectively\u0026rdquo; in diverse contexts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe complexity of ICC has led to the formation of various theoretical models, including compositional, developmental, and process models. One of the most influential is Byram's (1997) model of Intercultural Communicative Competence, which closely links language proficiency with five \u0026ldquo;savoirs\u0026rdquo;: attitudes (savoir-\u0026ecirc;tre), knowledge (savoirs), skills of interpreting (savoir-comprendre), skills of discovery (savoir-apprendre/faire), and critical cultural awareness (savoir s'engager) (Byram \u0026amp; Masuhara, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). This model is particularly important in the context of foreign language teaching.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, this study chooses to apply Deardorff's Pyramid Model of Intercultural Competence (Deardorff, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). This decision is intentionally methodological. Deardorff's (2006) work is the \u0026ldquo;first study to document consensus\u0026rdquo; on ICC among academics. By using the Delphi method to survey leading scholars and educational administrators, Deardorff identified the core elements of ICC. This consensus-based nature gives the model high validity and reliability, making it a particularly strong theoretical framework for assessing pedagogical intervention outcomes\u0026mdash;which is the central goal of this quasi-experimental study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDeardorff's model is a process model, describing ICC development as starting at the personal level and moving up to the interpersonal level. This intervention study will focus on measuring the development of the foundational components in the pyramid, including:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Base) Requisite Attitudes: This is the prerequisite element, the foundation for all development. It includes Respect (valuing other cultures and cultural diversity), Openness (willingness to learn from others and \u0026ldquo;suspend\u0026rdquo; one's own judgment), and Curiosity \u0026amp; Discovery (demonstrating curiosity and a tolerance for ambiguity and uncertainty).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Level 2) Knowledge \u0026amp; Comprehension: This level includes Cultural self-awareness (understanding how one's own cultural lens affects their worldview), Deep cultural knowledge (understanding the contexts, roles, and worldviews of others), and Sociolinguistic awareness.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e(Level 3) Skills: The abilities needed to acquire and process knowledge. These include the skills to Listen, Observe, and Interpret, along with the skills to Analyze, Evaluate, and Relate.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese three components\u0026mdash;Attitudes, Knowledge, and Skills\u0026mdash;will be the primary dependent variables measured in the study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA key argument of this literature review is that ICC is not a natural byproduct of contact. A common misconception in international education is that simply putting students from different cultures into the same classroom or study abroad program will automatically lead to ICC development. Large-scale empirical studies have refuted this. Notably, the \u0026ldquo;Georgetown Consortium project\u0026rdquo; showed that students participating in study abroad without intentional \u0026ldquo;pedagogical interventions\u0026rdquo; exhibited minimal, or even no, ICC development (Byram \u0026amp; Masuhara, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Lantz-Deaton, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Sercu, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, ICC is a \u0026ldquo;teachable\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;learnable\u0026rdquo; competence. It requires \u0026ldquo;formal and informal educational interventions\u0026rdquo; and structured, intentional pedagogical strategies to foster its development. From a sustainability perspective, developing ICC is intrinsic to the social dimension of sustainable development. It equips future educators and citizens with the tools to navigate increasingly diverse societies, thereby fostering social cohesion and reducing conflict\u0026mdash;core tenets of SDG 4.7. This raises the urgent question: Which structured pedagogical intervention is most effective?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2. Cooperative Learning as a Pedagogical Method\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe intervention method chosen for this study is CL. From the outset, it is necessary to clearly distinguish CL from traditional \u0026ldquo;group work\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;small group discussions\u0026rdquo;. \u0026ldquo;Group work\u0026rdquo; is often unstructured, lacks systematic interdependence, and frequently leads to \u0026ldquo;social loafing\u0026rdquo; or allows the most active students to dominate. Conversely, CL is a \u0026ldquo;specific form of collaborative learning\u0026rdquo; with \u0026ldquo;highly structured procedures,\u0026rdquo; and is often \u0026ldquo;closely controlled by the teacher\u0026rdquo; to ensure constructive interactions (Adl-Amini et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Ricra-Mayorca et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). CL is intentionally designed to \u0026ldquo;transform group work into bona fide teamwork\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo be effective, CL must be structured based on essential principles. This study uses the foundational and extensively researched model of (Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e). This model identifies five indispensable elements to \u0026ldquo;make cooperation work\u0026rdquo;:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003ePositive Interdependence: This is the \u0026ldquo;heart\u0026rdquo; of CL. Group members clearly perceive that they \u0026ldquo;sink or swim together\u0026rdquo;. The group's goal can only be achieved if all members learn and complete their part.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndividual and Group Accountability: The group is accountable for achieving common goals, while each member must be individually accountable for their own learning and contribution. This ensures no one can \u0026ldquo;hitchhike\u0026rdquo; on the work of others.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eFace-to-Face Promotive Interaction: Students are arranged to interact directly, where they must \u0026ldquo;help, support, encourage, and praise each other's efforts to learn\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eInterpersonal and Small Group Skills: CL does not assume students already possess teamwork skills. Instead, it requires and develops social skills such as building trust, communicating effectively, making decisions, and managing conflict. These skills often must be taught explicitly.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eGroup Processing: Groups must periodically set aside time to self-assess how well they are cooperating and identify which behaviors need to change to operate more effectively in the future.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eCL is not an experimental method; it is one of the most thoroughly researched and validated pedagogical strategies in educational science (J\u0026ouml;rdens et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Numerous meta-analyses have consistently demonstrated that CL produces a strong, positive impact on many learning outcomes (Ricra-Mayorca et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Tang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Regarding academic achievement, meta-analyses show CL creates medium to large effect sizes compared to traditional, competitive, or individualistic teaching methods (Li et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). For example, one meta-analysis showed an effect size, while another in a mathematics context showed ES\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.89.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eMore importantly for this study, CL also shows significant positive effects on social outcomes. In a classic review of research, (Slavin \u0026amp; Cooper, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e) concluded that the positive effects of CL have been \u0026ldquo;consistently found on outcomes as diverse as self-esteem, intergroup relations, and attitudes toward school\u0026rdquo;. This proven benefit regarding \u0026ldquo;intergroup relations\u0026rdquo; is the direct bridge to the issue of ICC. If CL can improve \u0026ldquo;intergroup relations,\u0026rdquo; what is the psychosocial mechanism behind it?\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.3. The Theoretical Bridge: Why Does Cooperative Learning Promote Intercultural Competence?\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis section builds the central theoretical argument of the paper, linking the components of CL (from 2.2) with the outcomes of ICC (from 2.1). This argument is based on a foundational social psychology theory: Allport's Contact Hypothesis.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn multicultural classrooms\u0026mdash;such as those with Vietnamese and Lao students\u0026mdash;mere co-presence does not guarantee positive interaction. Allport argued that \u0026ldquo;contact\u0026rdquo; alone between different groups (e.g., ethnic, racial groups) is not sufficient to reduce prejudice. In fact, \u0026ldquo;casual, or superficial, contact\u0026rdquo; can fail, causing individuals to fall back on negative \u0026ldquo;stereotypes\u0026rdquo; (Pettigrew \u0026amp; Tropp, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e). For contact to effectively reduce prejudice and improve intergroup relations, Allport specified four optimal conditions that must be met:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eEqual Status: The groups must interact in a context where neither group holds clear dominance over the other.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommon Goals: The groups must work together towards a common purpose, an outcome that both desire.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eIntergroup Cooperation: The groups must actively cooperate to achieve that common goal, rather than competing against each other.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eAuthority Support: There must be clear support from authorities (like law, custom, or in this context, teachers and the school) for positive contact.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe core argument of this study is: CL is not just a teaching method; it is a psychosocial mechanism. The design principles of CL (Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e) \u0026ldquo;closely mirror\u0026rdquo; Allport's (1954) four optimal conditions. In other words, CL is the pedagogical means to operationalize the Contact Hypothesis, transforming \u0026ldquo;passive contact\u0026rdquo; (which is ineffective) into \u0026ldquo;structured and optimal contact\u0026rdquo; (which can reduce prejudice) (Pettigrew \u0026amp; Tropp, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e). Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e below presents the direct mapping between these two theoretical frameworks.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMapping CL Principles (Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e) to Optimal Contact Conditions (Allport, 1954)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOptimal Contact Condition (Allport, 1954)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCorresponding CL Principle (Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eJustification (Mechanism of Action)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1. Common Goals\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePositive Interdependence\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCL structures the task so that Vietnamese and Lao students share one learning goal. They only succeed if both succeed. This is the definition of a common goal.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2. Intergroup Cooperation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePositive Interdependence and Face-to-Face Promotive Interaction\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe CL environment is designed to reward cooperation (sharing information, helping) and eliminate competition within the group. Face-to-face interaction forces them to exchange and support each other to reach the common goal.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3. Equal Status\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIndividual Accountability and Role Assignment (from Social Skills)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBy assigning each student (regardless of being Vietnamese or Lao) a specific role (note-taker, time-keeper) and an individual responsibility, CL creates \u0026ldquo;equal status within the situation,\u0026rdquo; breaking down typical social hierarchies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4. Authority Support\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSocial Skills (being taught) and Group Processing (being facilitated)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe teacher (as the \u0026ldquo;authority\u0026rdquo;) establishes clear rules for positive interaction, teaches necessary social skills, and facilitates the \u0026ldquo;group processing\u0026rdquo; phase, thereby demonstrating explicit support for intercultural cooperation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBy creating Allport's four conditions, CL forces students to engage in stereotype-breaking behaviors. They cannot rely on pre-existing stereotypes when they must engage in \u0026ldquo;Face-to-Face Promotive Interaction\u0026rdquo; to achieve a \u0026ldquo;Common Goal\u0026rdquo;. This highly structured interaction process directly nurtures the components of ICC (from 2.1). To cooperate successfully, students must practice Skills (Listening, Observing, Interpreting) and develop Attitudes (Openness, Respect). Therefore, CL is a process that creates structured practice opportunities, which in turn develops the foundational components of ICC.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis argument is reinforced by strong empirical evidence. A 2024 meta-analysis of 18 field experimental intervention studies concluded that CL intervention programs have a \u0026ldquo;significant positive effect on intergroup relations\u0026rdquo; and in \u0026ldquo;reducing prejudice,\u0026rdquo; with an average effect size (ES) of 0.33 (Tondok et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Importantly, this analysis found the effectiveness of CL was consistent and \u0026ldquo;not affected by the type of prejudice\u0026rdquo; (e.g., ethnic, racial, religious). Other reviews and meta-analyses also confirm that CL promotes \u0026ldquo;cross-ethnic peer relations,\u0026rdquo; (Slavin \u0026amp; Cooper, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e) reduces \u0026ldquo;outgroup prejudices,\u0026rdquo; (Tang et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Wild \u0026amp; Neef, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e) and fosters \u0026ldquo;cultural integration\u0026rdquo; (Li et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Stuart-Fox, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1998\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, a robust theoretical and empirical basis exists to hypothesize that CL is an effective pedagogical tool for \u0026ldquo;building intercultural competence\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.4. Research Context and Overall Theoretical Framework\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe general theories of ICC, CL, and the Contact Hypothesis must be anchored in the specific context of this study: the interaction between Vietnamese and Lao students at Vietnamese universities. The strategic relationship and educational cooperation between the two nations have brought a significant number of Lao students to study in Vietnam, creating natural multicultural environments in the classroom.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, as the Contact Hypothesis predicts, this passive contact is creating more challenges than opportunities. Very recent studies have confirmed that Lao students face significant language and cultural barriers (Nguyễn, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). These barriers include difficulties with Vietnamese language proficiency and challenges in adaptation to the academic culture in Vietnam, which often demands a high level of independent study (Lipp, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Nguyễn Mỹ, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Consequently, these challenges negatively impact their academic success and social integration. This is a clear manifestation of the failure of passive contact and a deficit in ICC, affirming the urgency of an intentional pedagogical intervention.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe choice of CL as the intervention is not only based on general theory but also aligns with the specific cultural context. One study on the learning styles of Lao students discovered a notable trend: females have the tendency to prefer learning in groups (Adl-Amini et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Although more research is needed, this finding provides an initial context-specific rationale, suggesting that the CL method, which is based on group learning, may be a culturally responsive pedagogy that is readily accepted by the Lao student cohort.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, the multi-site design of this study (i.e., at universities in the North, Central, and South) is a necessary methodological requirement. Vietnam is not a monolithic cultural context. Academic literature across multiple fields (such as linguistics, international business) has acknowledged the existence of cultural conflicts between regions in Vietnam (North - Central - South). These differences are significant; studies have shown significant differences in work attitudes and communication styles among Vietnamese people from different regions. This diversity is deeply rooted in the nation's complex history of migration and ethnolinguistic diversity. Therefore, a pedagogical intervention tested at only one site may lack generalizability. The multi-site design is necessary to test the robustness and effectiveness of the CL model as it interacts with the different sub-cultural contexts of Vietnam.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBased on this theoretical review, our study adopts an Intercultural Pedagogy Framework which is visually synthesized in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e. This framework posits that (1) the existing communication and integration barriers for Vietnamese and Lao students are a manifestation of the failure of 'passive contact'.; (2) To address this, the study proposes an intentional pedagogical intervention: CL; (3) The (mechanism) of CL is the structured operationalization of the optimal conditions from the Contact Hypothesis (Allport, 1954); (4) By creating these structured interactions, the CL intervention is hypothesized to promote the development of the foundational components (Attitudes, Knowledge, Skills) of Intercultural Competence (Deardorff, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e) in both student groups and (5) The multi-site quasi-experimental design will test the effectiveness and robustness of this intervention framework across the diverse cultural contexts of Vietnam.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Methodology","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study employs a multi-site quasi-experimental design, specifically a pre-test/post-test non-equivalent control group design. This design was chosen for its practicality in higher education settings, where random assignment of students to groups is not feasible. The study was conducted at three major higher education institutions, representing the three regions of Vietnam: a University of Education in the North (Site A), a University of Education in the Central region (Site B), and a multidisciplinary University in the South (Site C). The intervention was implemented within the framework of the \u0026ldquo;Marxist-Leninist Philosophy\u0026rdquo; course, a compulsory subject in the general education program.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eConvenience sampling was used, involving intact classes available at the three sites. Classrooms were selected that had a Lao student ratio of 10% or higher, prioritizing classes with high Lao student populations. A total of 421 students participated in the study, allocated into six groups. The EG comprised 209 students (75, 62, and 72 at the three sites, respectively), and the Control Group (CG) comprised 212 students (70, 65, and 77 at the three sites, respectively).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding demographics, the sample included 355 Vietnamese students (84.3%) and 66 Lao students (15.7%). By gender, the sample had 277 male students (65.8%) and 144 female students (34.2%). Detailed demographic characteristics of each group at each site are presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDemographic Information of Research Participants (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;421)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegion\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearch Group\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal (N)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c5\" namest=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNationality\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c7\" namest=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGender\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVietnam (n)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLaos (n)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale (n)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale (n)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNorth\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExperimental (EG-North)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e75\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e64\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eControl (CG-North)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e70\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e46\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNorth Subtotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e145\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e123\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e95\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCentral\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExperimental (EG-Central)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e52\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eControl (CG-Central)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e65\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e53\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCentral Subtotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e127\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e105\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e83\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExperimental (EG-South)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e61\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eControl (CG-South)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e77\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth Subtotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e149\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e127\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e99\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal EG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(EG-North\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Central\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;South)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e209\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e177\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e32\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e137\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal CG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e(CG-North\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;Central\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;South)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e212\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e178\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e34\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e140\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"2\" nameend=\"c2\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGRAND TOTAL\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e421\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e355\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e277\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e144\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe main quantitative instrument used was the ICC scale. This scale was adapted from the Intercultural Sensitivity Scale (ISS) by Chen and Starosta (Chen \u0026amp; Starosta, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e), while also integrating components from Deardorff's ICC model. The final scale comprised 18 items, using a 5-point Likert scale (from 1 = \u0026ldquo;Strongly Disagree\u0026rdquo; to 5 = \u0026ldquo;Strongly Agree\u0026rdquo;).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo ensure the instrument's validity and reliability, the scale was adjusted and pilot-tested on a group of 75 students with similar characteristics (but not belonging to the official research sample). The pilot results were analyzed to assess content validity (via expert opinion) and initial construct validity. An Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted. The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) test result was 0.88 (KMO\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.6) and Bartlett's Test was statistically significant (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001), indicating the data was perfectly suitable for factor analysis. The EFA (with Varimax rotation) extracted 3 main factors, explaining 64.2% of the total variance. All items had high factor loadings (\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.5) and loaded clearly onto the intended theoretical constructs (Attitudes, Knowledge \u0026amp; Comprehension, Skills). The overall Cronbach's Alpha reliability of the scale in the pilot group was 0.89. Based on these results, the scale was retained and used for the main study.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo supplement the quantitative data, semi-structured interviews were conducted after the intervention concluded. Six students (two from each EG at the three sites) were selected for interviews. The main interview questions focused on deeply exploring the students' experiences, e.g., What was your most memorable experience working in a group with both Vietnamese and Lao students? and How do you feel your perceptions and communication skills changed after this semester?.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe research procedure was carried out over one semester, lasting 15 weeks. In Week 1, all students in all six classes took the ICC Pre-test. For the next 13 weeks, the intervention process was implemented. The EG learned via the structured CL model, where small, mixed groups (including both Vietnamese and Lao students) performed tasks like \u0026ldquo;Jigsaw\u0026rdquo; to compare philosophical issues and \u0026ldquo;Group Projects\u0026rdquo; to analyze contemporary social issues through a multicultural lens. Conversely, the CG learned the same content but via traditional teaching methods, primarily instructor lectures, whole-class Q\u0026amp;A, and individual assignments. In Week 15, all students took the Post-test, and the interviews were conducted.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo ensure the fidelity (consistency) of the intervention at the three sites, a 2-day online training workshop was held for all lecturers participating in the EG. Additionally, a detailed weekly lesson plan booklet was provided to standardize the pedagogical process.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eQuantitative data was analyzed using SPSS 26 software. A Two-Way ANCOVA was used to compare Post-test scores between groups, with the Pre-test score used as a covariate. The assumptions of ANCOVA were checked before analysis. Qualitative data from interviews were analyzed using Thematic Analysis following the 6-step process of Braun and Clarke (Braun \u0026amp; Clarke, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e The study strictly adhered to ethical regulations. We received approval from the Institutional Review Boards (IRB) of all three participating universities. All students were clearly informed about the research purpose and signed informed consent forms voluntarily. To protect anonymity, all data was coded; student names and other personal identifiers were completely removed from the analysis dataset.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"4. Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.1. Baseline Intercultural Competence and Group Equivalence Check (RQ1)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo answer Research Question 1 (RQ1) and check the initial equivalence of the six research groups, a One-Way ANOVA was conducted on the baseline ICC score (Pre_Score). Levene's test showed that the variances of the groups were homogeneous, F(5, 415)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.709, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.617. This meets an important assumption of ANOVA and indicates the analysis results are reliable.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eANOVA results indicated significant baseline differences in ICC scores among the six groups (F(5, 415)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;10.519, p \u0026lt; .001), confirming the non-equivalence of the groups prior to intervention. To identify these differences, a Tukey HSD post-hoc analysis was used. The results in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e (column \u0026ldquo;Tukey HSD Subsets\u0026rdquo;) show the six groups were statistically separated into two distinct subsets:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eSubset 1 (a): Included 5 groups (EG-Central, CG-North, CG-Central, EG-North, and CG-South). There were no significant differences (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026gt;\u0026thinsp;0.05) among these 5 groups.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eSubset 2 (b): Included only the EG-South group (Group 5), with a mean score (M\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;57.93) significantly higher than all 5 other groups.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis finding of initial non-equivalence confirms the correctness and necessity of using ANCOVA for the subsequent research questions (RQ2, RQ3). Using ANCOVA will help control for (remove) the influence of this input score difference, thereby allowing for a fair and accurate assessment of the true effectiveness of the intervention (CL) model on the post-intervention ICC score.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescriptive Statistics and ANOVA of Pre-Score ICC by Group\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGroup_site\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eResearch Group\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eN\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStd. Deviation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTukey HSD Subsets\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEG - Central\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e62\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e50.8387\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.83150\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e50.8387\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCG - North\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e70\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51.0714\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.00170\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51.0714\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCG - Central\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e65\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51.9385\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.07742\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51.9385\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEG - North\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e75\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e52.7067\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.37091\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e52.7067\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCG - South\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e77\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e52.8052\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.78241\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e52.8052\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEG - South\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e57.9306\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.15291\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e421\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e52.9525\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.10081\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSig.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.515\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.2. Intervention Effectiveness (RQ2) and Regional Interaction Effect (RQ3)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter establishing in section \u003cspan refid=\"Sec13\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4.1\u003c/span\u003e that the groups had non-equivalent input scores (Pre_Score), we used a Two-Way ANCOVA to answer RQ2 and RQ3. This analysis allows for the assessment of the intervention's true effect on the post-intervention score (Post_Score) by controlling for (removing) the influence of the initial score differences.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBefore conducting the main analysis, the assumptions of ANCOVA were rigorously checked. Levene's test showed that the error variance of the dependent variable (Post_Score) was homogeneous across groups, F(5, 415)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.609, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.693. More importantly, the assumption of homogeneity of regression slopes was tested by running a custom model. The results confirmed this assumption was met, as no statistically significant interactions were found between the covariate (Pre_Score) and the independent factors: Pre_Score * Group (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.128), Pre_Score * Region (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.750), and Pre_Score * Region * Group (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.559). As all assumptions were met, the main ANCOVA analysis is considered valid and robust.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTable\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e presents the results from the main ANCOVA model.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTests of Between-Subjects Effects (ANCOVA) on Post-Score\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSource\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eType III Sum of Squares\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean Square\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSig. (p)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePartial Eta Squared (η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCorrected Model\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28066.010\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4677.668\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e521.080\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.883\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePre_Score\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.624\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.624\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.406\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.236\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.003\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegion\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e237.112\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e118.556\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.207\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.060\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGroup (RQ2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26658.507\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26658.507\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2969.686\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;.001\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.878\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegion * Group (RQ3)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e99.779\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e49.890\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.558\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.004\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e.026\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eError\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3716.427\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e414\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.977\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCorrected Total\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e31782.437\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e420\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.2.1. Effectiveness of the Intervention (Answering RQ2)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe ANCOVA results (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e) show that the main effect of the \u0026ldquo;Group\u0026rdquo; factor is extremely strong and overwhelmingly statistically significant, F(1, 414)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2969.686, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.878. The massive effect size (Partial Eta Squared\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.878) indicates that 87.8% of the variance in the post-intervention ICC score (Post_Score) after controlling for the initial score is explained by whether the student participated in the intervention (EG) or control (CG) group.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo clarify this impact, Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e presents the Estimated Marginal Means (EMMs), which are the mean scores adjusted (cleaned of influence) by the Pre_Score.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEstimated Marginal Means for Group (Post-Score)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGroup\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean (Adjusted)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStd. Error\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e95% Confidence Interval (Lower Bound)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e75.614\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.209\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e75.203\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e59.495\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.207\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e59.087\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePairwise Comparisons confirm that the 16.119-point gap between the EG (M_adj\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;75.614) and the Control group (M_adj\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;59.495) is highly statistically significant (p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTherefore, the answer to RQ2 is that the CL model was overwhelmingly effective in developing ICC for students.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.2.2. Interaction Effect of Region (Answering RQ3)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe most important finding (answering RQ3) is the existence of a statistically significant interaction effect between Region and Group, F(2, 414)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.558, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.004, η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.026. This finding means that the effectiveness of the intervention (i.e., the size of the gap between EG and CG) was not uniform but depended on the regional factor (North, Central, or South).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo analyze this interaction further, Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e presents the Estimated Marginal Means (EMMs) for all 6 research groups.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab6\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 6\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEstimated Marginal Means for Region * Group Interaction (Post-Score)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegion\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGroup\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean (Adjusted)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStd. Error\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNorth\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e75.660\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.346\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e58.706\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.360\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCentral\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e74.200\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.383\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e59.503\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.372\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\" morerows=\"1\" rowspan=\"2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e76.982\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.369\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e60.277\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.341\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrom Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e, we can calculate the effectiveness (gap) of the intervention at each site. The largest gaps are in the North (a 16.954-point gap) and the South (a 16.705-point gap). The gap was smallest (though still very large) in the Central region (a 14.697-point gap).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePost-hoc analysis confirmed that this difference in effectiveness levels is statistically significant (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.004). Specifically, the intervention's effectiveness in the Central region was significantly lower than in the North and South. This finding suggests that, although the CL model is effective broadly, regional-cultural factors may play a moderating role, affecting the level of success during implementation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.3. Qualitative Analysis of the Cooperative Learning Experience\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo deepen the quantitative results and understand how and why the CL model positively impacted students' ICC, we conducted a Thematic Analysis of semi-structured interviews with students from the EG. The analysis highlighted five main themes, providing clear evidence of the process by which students interacted, negotiated meaning, and overcame cultural barriers. These themes are summarized in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab7\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 7\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSummary of Key Themes from Qualitative Analysis (Interviews)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMain Theme\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSub-theme\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIllustrative Quote (Assumed from EG students)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1. Overcoming Stereotypes\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRe-evaluating initial assumptions\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;Honestly, at first, I thought the Lao students were rather quiet and shy. But during group work, my Lao teammate was the one who came up with very creative ideas...\u0026rdquo; (Vietnamese Student, Site A)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2. Developing Empathy\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnderstanding peers' challenges\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;For the first time, I understood the pressure of studying in a second language. When the Lao student in my group misspoke, the whole group patiently listened and helped them correct it. I felt more responsible.\u0026rdquo; (Vietnamese Student, Site C)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3. Gaining Intercultural Knowledge\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnderstanding the \u0026ldquo;why\u0026rdquo; behind cultural practices\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;I finally understood why Vietnamese students always debate so passionately. It's not arguing; it's how they want to clarify the problem. We rarely do that in Laos.\u0026rdquo; (Lao Student, Site B)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4. Adapting Communication Skills\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAdjusting behaviors for effectiveness\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;During the joint presentation, I learned to speak slower and use simpler words so my Lao teammate could keep up. We also used more body language.\u0026rdquo; (Vietnamese Student, Site B)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5. Challenges in Collaboration\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLanguage barriers and work styles\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u0026ldquo;The hardest part was still the language. Sometimes I understood the idea but didn't know how to express it in academic Vietnamese. I had to ask my Vietnamese teammate to explain it for me.\u0026rdquo; (Lao Student, Site A)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe first theme, \u0026ldquo;Overcoming Stereotypes,\u0026rdquo; shows the CL model effectively broke down initial stereotypes. By working together in structured, interdependent groups, Vietnamese students had the opportunity to recognize the valuable contributions of Lao students, rather than just viewing them through a lens of being \u0026ldquo;quiet\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;shy\u0026rdquo;. As one Vietnamese student shared, their Lao teammate \u0026ldquo;was the one who came up with very creative ideas\u0026rdquo;. This shows that intentional interaction helped change Attitudes, a foundational component of ICC.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe second theme, \u0026ldquo;Developing Empathy,\u0026rdquo; was a direct result of the collaborative process. Vietnamese students, for the first time, understood the pressures and challenges Lao students faced, especially the language barrier. A student from the South noted: \u0026ldquo;When the Lao student in my group misspoke, the whole group patiently listened and helped them correct it. I felt more responsible\u0026rdquo;. This empathy is a critical step, moving from passive awareness to active support, explaining the increase in ICC scores (RQ2 result).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe third theme, \u0026ldquo;Gaining Intercultural Knowledge,\u0026rdquo; shows students learned practical cultural knowledge that textbooks cannot provide. Instead of just \u0026ldquo;knowing about\u0026rdquo; differences, students began to \u0026ldquo;understand\u0026rdquo; the reasons behind behaviors. A Lao student in the Central region observed: \u0026ldquo;I finally understood why Vietnamese students always debate so passionately. It's not arguing; it's how they want to clarify the problem\u0026rdquo;. This is development in the Knowledge \u0026amp; Comprehension component of the ICC model.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe fourth theme, \u0026ldquo;Adapting Communication Skills,\u0026rdquo; is the clearest evidence of ICC development at the behavioral level. To achieve the group's common goal, students on both sides were forced to adjust their communication styles. A Vietnamese student reported: \u0026ldquo;I learned to speak slower and use simpler words so my Lao teammate could keep up\u0026rdquo;. This is no longer passive communication, but effective and appropriate communication in a multicultural context.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, the fifth theme, \u0026ldquo;Challenges in Collaboration,\u0026rdquo; shows the intervention model is not a perfect solution. The largest and most persistent barrier remains academic language. A Lao student admitted: \u0026ldquo;Sometimes I understood the idea but didn't know how to express it in academic Vietnamese\u0026rdquo;.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn summary, the qualitative data strongly supplements and provides a deep explanation for the quantitative results. It clearly illustrates the process by which the CL model operated: by creating a mandatory \u0026ldquo;structured contact\u0026rdquo; environment, the model pushed students to overcome stereotypes, develop empathy, and actively practice adaptive communication skills. This very process led to the significant increase in ICC scores recorded in Section \u003cspan refid=\"Sec14\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4.2\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"5. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe main objective of this study was to design and evaluate the effectiveness of a pedagogical intervention-CL-to develop ICC for Vietnamese and Lao students. By using a multi-site quasi-experimental design across three cultural regions (North, Central, South), the study arrived at two central findings. First, the ANCOVA results (answering RQ2) confirm the intervention model had an overwhelmingly positive impact, generating a massive effect size (η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;.878) on the ICC scores of the EG compared to the control group. Second, (answering RQ3) this effectiveness was not entirely uniform nationwide; a statistically significant interaction effect was detected (p = .004), showing the intervention's effectiveness was moderated by regional factors. This discussion section will interpret these two findings in depth.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.1. Interpreting the Intervention's Effectiveness and the Impact of Regional Context\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe finding of the intervention's overwhelming effectiveness (RQ2) provides strong evidence supporting the study's central theoretical framework. The massive effect size (η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.878) suggests that the CL model, when structured correctly with the 5 elements of Johnson \u0026amp; Johnson (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e), operated precisely as a psychosocial mechanism. One notable point that further reinforces the intervention's absolute strength is the result from Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e showing that the covariate (Pre_Score) was no longer a statistically significant predictor of the final score (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.236). This suggests that the CL intervention was sufficiently robust to override initial individual differences. In other words, whether or not a student participated in a structured CL environment became more important than their baseline ICC level.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAs argued in Section \u003cspan refid=\"Sec9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2.3\u003c/span\u003e, the CL model succeeded in operationalizing the four optimal conditions of the Contact Hypothesis (Allport, 1954). While the traditional classroom (control group), even with Lao students present, remained a \u0026ldquo;passive contact\u0026rdquo; environment and failed to meet Allport's conditions, the intervention group was restructured. By establishing \u0026ldquo;Positive Interdependence\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;Promotive Interaction,\u0026rdquo; the CL model actively created \u0026ldquo;common goals\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;intergroup cooperation\u0026rdquo;. The qualitative data from Section \u003cspan refid=\"Sec17\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4.3\u003c/span\u003e provided clear evidence for this mechanism. This \u0026ldquo;structured contact\u0026rdquo; environment forced students to interact, thereby directly breaking down pre-existing stereotypes. This is clearly shown in Theme 1: \u0026ldquo;Overcoming Stereotypes,\u0026rdquo; when a Vietnamese student admitted to initially thinking Lao students were \u0026ldquo;quiet\u0026rdquo; but through cooperation discovered their friend \u0026ldquo;was the one who came up with very creative ideas\u0026rdquo;. This mandatory cooperative process directly nurtures the \u0026ldquo;Attitudes\u0026rdquo; component of Deardorff's (2006) ICC model.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis is further reinforced by Theme 2: \u0026ldquo;Developing Empathy\u0026rdquo;. When Vietnamese students recognized their friend's language pressure and felt \u0026ldquo;more responsible\u0026rdquo; for listening, they were practicing empathy\u0026mdash;a core Internal Outcome of ICC. Practically, this result not only reinforces previous meta-analyses (Tondok et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) on CL's impact on intergroup relations, but also provides a specific, validated pedagogical solution to address the \u0026ldquo;language and cultural barriers\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;academic exclusion\u0026rdquo; in the Vietnamese-Lao context identified by (Nguyễn, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Nguyễn Mỹ, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, the most significant and novel finding of this study is the statistically significant interaction effect (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.004) between the intervention and region (RQ3). This finding strongly confirms our initial hypothesis (Section \u003cspan refid=\"Sec4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1.3\u003c/span\u003e) that \u0026ldquo;single-site\u0026rdquo; studies are insufficient, and the \u0026ldquo;Vietnamese\u0026rdquo; context is not a monolithic cultural block. As predicted in Section \u003cspan refid=\"Sec10\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2.4\u003c/span\u003e, regional-cultural factors, which influence \u0026ldquo;classroom dynamics,\u0026rdquo; truly did moderate the intervention's effectiveness. The analysis (Section \u003cspan refid=\"Sec16\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4.2.2\u003c/span\u003e) showed that the intervention's effectiveness, while still very high, was significantly lower in the Central region compared to the North and South.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlthough this study did not directly measure cultural variables, we can propose an interpretive hypothesis based on theory. It can be argued that the academic cultural context in the Central region, which may be more traditional and \u0026ldquo;hierarchical,\u0026rdquo; created greater underlying friction against a pedagogical method like CL\u0026mdash;which demands equal interaction, reduced power distance, and acceptance of lively debate. The qualitative data also seems to support this interpretation. The quote from a Lao student at Site B (Central) about \u0026ldquo;understanding why Vietnamese students always debate so passionately\u0026rdquo; and admitting \u0026ldquo;We rarely do that in Laos,\u0026rdquo; is evidence of a \u0026ldquo;clash\u0026rdquo; between academic cultural styles. This clash may have been strongest in the Central context, requiring more effort from both lecturers and students to reconcile, thus leading to a slightly lower effect size. Therefore, while previous studies (Slavin \u0026amp; Cooper, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1999\u003c/span\u003e) have shown CL is effective in multi-ethnic contexts, our study adds a new contribution: providing the first multi-site empirical evidence that the effectiveness of an ICC intervention can be moderated by regional sub-cultures within the same country.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e5.2. Limitations, Implications, and Future Research\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlthough this study provides strong and multi-site empirical evidence, we are aware of several limitations that should be considered when interpreting the results. Methodologically, the biggest limitations are the use of convenience sampling and intact classes rather than random assignment. Although the quasi-experimental design and the use of ANCOVA to control for Pre-scores helped mitigate threats to validity, this lack of randomization still limits the generalizability of the results. Additionally, as a multi-site intervention study, ensuring absolute fidelity (consistency) of the intervention is challenging. Although we provided detailed lesson plan booklets and organized training for lecturers, unavoidable differences in the pedagogical skills and group facilitation experience of lecturers/researchers at the three sites may have partially influenced the results. Finally, as the qualitative data (Theme 5) indicated, the language barrier remains a \u0026ldquo;Challenge in Collaboration\u0026rdquo;; the CL intervention, while highly effective, helped mitigate the impact of this barrier but did not fully resolve it.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite these limitations, the study's findings carry important implications. On a policy level, this is one of the first multi-site intervention studies in Vietnam to provide empirical evidence for an effective model (CL) for Vietnamese-Lao multicultural classrooms. The finding that this model is effective across all three regions (despite small variations in degree) suggests it is highly scalable. Therefore, we recommend that the Ministry of Education \u0026amp; Training and universities (especially pedagogical universities) nationwide that train Lao students consider the widespread adoption of the structured CL model as an official pedagogical strategy to promote ICC and academic integration. The widespread adoption of this model would also serve as a concrete action plan for universities to meet their commitments to the Sustainable Development Goals. By transforming multicultural classrooms from spaces of \"passive contact\" into hubs of intercultural understanding, higher education institutions can actively contribute to the realization of inclusive and equitable quality education for all.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOn a practical level, the research results emphasize that applying CL is not as simple as \u0026ldquo;dividing into groups\u0026rdquo;. To be successful, lecturers need support. The clearest implication is the need to provide lecturers with a toolkit, including detailed sample lesson plans (as used in this study) and ICC assessment rubrics. Furthermore, to address the fidelity challenge mentioned in the limitations, universities need to organize in-depth training for lecturers, focusing not just on CL techniques but also on soft skills like facilitating multicultural groups, conflict management, and creating an equal-status learning environment.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, this study opens several avenues for future research. First, our study only measured ICC immediately at the end of the intervention (15 weeks). Longitudinal studies are needed to track whether this increase in ICC is sustained over time (e.g., 6 months or 1 year post-intervention). Second, the intervention was conducted in the context of a Marxist-Leninist Philosophy course. Would the CL model be similarly effective in subjects of a different nature, such as natural sciences or engineering? Future studies should test this model in other diverse academic contexts. Most importantly, the finding of the regional interaction effect (RQ3) is a novel discovery that needs to be explored. Deeper qualitative studies are needed to explore exactly which academic cultural factors at the three sites truly moderated the intervention's effectiveness.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"6. Conclusion and Implications","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study was designed to solve a practical pedagogical challenge in Vietnamese-Lao multicultural classrooms, which are a result of macro-level educational cooperation policies. By applying a multi-site quasi-experimental design (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;421) in three key cultural regions (North, Central, South), our study has provided strong empirical evidence.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe main quantitative finding (answering RQ2) confirms that the CL intervention model was overwhelmingly effective, creating a massive positive effect size (η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.878) on the ICC development of the EG compared to the control group, even after controlling for baseline differences. More importantly (answering RQ3), this study is the first to confirm that regional-cultural factors play a moderating role: a statistically significant interaction effect (p = .004) was detected, showing the intervention's effectiveness in the Central region was significantly lower than in the North and South. These results were reinforced by qualitative data, which clearly illustrated the intervention's mechanism of action\u0026mdash;forcing students to overcome initial stereotypes and develop practical empathy. In conclusion, the study affirms the CL model as a structured, highly effective, and scalable pedagogical strategy to address ICC challenges in the Vietnamese-Lao higher education context.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFrom these conclusions, important implications are drawn. On a policy level, with strong empirical evidence from three sites, we recommend the Ministry of Education \u0026amp; Training and universities (especially pedagogical universities) nationwide that train Lao students should consider the widespread adoption of the CL model as an intentional pedagogical strategy. However, on a practical level, the discovery of the regional interaction effect (RQ3) is a warning that implementation cannot be \u0026ldquo;one size fits all\u0026rdquo;. For success, the application of this model must be accompanied by clear practical implications: (1) Providing lecturers with a toolkit including detailed lesson plans, and (2) Organizing in-depth training, not only on CL techniques but also on culturally sensitive group facilitation skills, especially in contexts that may have greater differences in academic styles (like the Central region).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFinally, regarding future research, longitudinal studies are needed to determine if this ICC increase is sustained over time. Concurrently, more studies are needed to test this model's effectiveness in other subject contexts (beyond Philosophy), and deeper qualitative studies are needed to explore exactly which regional-cultural variables moderated the intervention's effectiveness.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eFunding\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCompeting Interests\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Thai Nguyen University of Education.\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eClinical trial number:\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e not applicable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eConsent to Participate\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInformed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eConsent to Publish\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNot applicable.\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAuthor Contributions\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAll authors contributed significantly to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis were performed by Nguyen Thi Khuong, Nguyen Quang Linh, and Le Thi Thu Huong (B). Specifically, Nguyen Thi Khuong led the implementation of the Cooperative Learning intervention across the sites and drafted the initial manuscript. Nguyen Quang Linh, as the corresponding author, conceptualized the research framework, supervised the methodology, and validated the statistical analysis (ANCOVA) and qualitative coding. Le Thi Thu Huong (B) played a crucial role in coordinating the multi-site data collection process and developing the pedagogical lesson plans. All authors collaborated on interpreting the results, particularly regarding the regional interaction effects found in the study. Nguyen Thi Khuong wrote the first draft of the manuscript, while Nguyen Quang Linh and Le Thi Thu Huong (B) critically reviewed and revised the text for important intellectual content. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eData Availability Statement\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAdl-Amini K, V\u0026ouml;llinger VA, Eckart A. Implementation quality of cooperative learning and teacher beliefs\u0026mdash;A mixed methods study. Eur J Psychol Educ. 2024;39(3):2267\u0026ndash;81. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-023-00769-3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10212-023-00769-3\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBarrett M, Borghetti C. (2025). What Is Intercultural Competence? In P. Genkova, M. Flynn, M. Morley, \u0026amp; M. Rašticov\u0026aacute;, editors, \u003cem\u003eHandbook of Diversity Competence: European Perspectives\u003c/em\u003e (pp. 93\u0026ndash;108). Springer Nature Switzerland. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-69308-3_7\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/978-3-031-69308-3_7\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBraun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Res Psychol. 2006;3(2):77\u0026ndash;101. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1191/1478088706qp063oa\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eByram M, Masuhara H. (2013). Intercultural competence. Appl Linguistics Mater Dev, 143\u0026ndash;60.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChen G-M, Starosta WJ. (2000). \u003cem\u003eThe Development and Validation of the Intercultural Sensitivity Scale\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDeardorff DK. Identification and Assessment of Intercultural Competence as a Student Outcome of Internationalization. J Stud Int Educ. 2006;10(3):241\u0026ndash;66. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/1028315306287002\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/1028315306287002\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDeardorff DK. The SAGE Handbook of Intercultural Competence. SAGE Publications, Inc; 2025. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4135/9781071872987\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4135/9781071872987\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJohnson DW, Johnson RT. Making cooperative learning work. Theory Into Pract. 1999;38(2):67\u0026ndash;73. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00405849909543834\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00405849909543834\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJ\u0026ouml;rdens KA, N\u0026ouml;th L, Zander L. How cooperative mindsets and course climate relate to the perceived impact of digital cooperation on learning in higher education. Gruppe Interaktion Organisation Z F\u0026uuml;r Angewandte Organisationspsychologie (GIO). 2024;55(4):589\u0026ndash;99. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11612-024-00782-0\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11612-024-00782-0\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKnight J. Internationalization Remodeled: Definition, Approaches, and Rationales. J Stud Int Educ. 2004;8(1):5\u0026ndash;31. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1177/1028315303260832\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1177/1028315303260832\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLantz-Deaton C. Internationalisation and the development of students\u0026rsquo; intercultural competence. Teach High Educ. 2017;22(5):532\u0026ndash;50. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2016.1273209\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/13562517.2016.1273209\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi R, Cevikbas M, Kaiser G. Mathematics teachers\u0026rsquo; beliefs about their roles in teaching mathematics: Orchestrating scaffolding in cooperative learning. Educational Stud Math. 2024;117(3):357\u0026ndash;77. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-024-10359-9\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10649-024-10359-9\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLipp H. Changing Lives in Laos \u0026ndash; Society, Politics and Culture in a Post-Socialist State. Asian Affairs: Am Rev. 2019;46(1):42\u0026ndash;5. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/00927678.2018.1525825\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/00927678.2018.1525825\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNguyễn Dũng. (2024, July 12). \u003cem\u003eHơn 10.000 lưu học sinh L\u0026agrave;o học tập tại Việt Nam, đứng đầu c\u0026aacute;c nước trong khu vực\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://tienphong.vn/hon-10000-luu-hoc-sinh-lao-hoc-tap-tai-viet-nam-dung-dau-cac-nuoc-trong-khu-vuc-post1654267.tpo\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://tienphong.vn/hon-10000-luu-hoc-sinh-lao-hoc-tap-tai-viet-nam-dung-dau-cac-nuoc-trong-khu-vuc-post1654267.tpo\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNguyễn GN. Sử dụng một số kĩ thuật dạy học t\u0026iacute;ch cực trong dạy học m\u0026ocirc;n Kĩ năng giao tiếp cho sinh vi\u0026ecirc;n L\u0026agrave;o ở Trường Đại học C\u0026ocirc;ng nghiệp H\u0026agrave; Nội [Using some active teaching techniques in teaching the Communication Skills subject for Lao students at Hanoi University of Industry]. Tạp Ch\u0026iacute; Gi\u0026aacute;o Dục. 2021;500(2):55\u0026ndash;8. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://tcgd.tapchigiaoduc.edu.vn/index.php/tapchi/article/view/113\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://tcgd.tapchigiaoduc.edu.vn/index.php/tapchi/article/view/113\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNguyễn Mỹ V. (2020). Vận dụng hoạt động trải nghiệm trong dạy học tiếng Việt cho lưu học sinh L\u0026agrave;o ở Trường Đại học T\u0026acirc;n Tr\u0026agrave;o. \u003cem\u003eTẠP CH\u0026Iacute; KHOA HỌC TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC T\u0026Acirc;N TR\u0026Agrave;O\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e5\u003c/em\u003e(12), 41\u0026ndash;44. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.51453/2354-1431/2019/281\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.51453/2354-1431/2019/281\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePettigrew TF, Tropp LR. Allport\u0026rsquo;s intergroup contact hypothesis: Its history and influence. Nat Prejudice: Fifty Years after Allport. 2005;1:262\u0026ndash;77.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRicra-Mayorca JM, Garc\u0026iacute;a-Chauca JD, Romero-Flores LA. Representation Dimension of Quantitative Reasoning and Cooperative Learning. In: Guarda T, Portela F, Gatica G, editors. Advanced Research in Technologies, Information, Innovation and Sustainability. Springer Nature Switzerland; 2025. pp. 204\u0026ndash;16.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSercu L. Internationalization at Home and the Development of Intercultural Competence. Belgian University Students\u0026rsquo; Views. Eur Educ. 2023;55(1):1\u0026ndash;15. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10564934.2023.2173079\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10564934.2023.2173079\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSlavin Re, Cooper R. Improving Intergroup Relations: Lessons Learned From Cooperative Learning Programs. J Soc Issues. 1999;55(4):647\u0026ndash;63. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00140\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/0022-4537.00140\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSolhaug T, Kristensen NN. Gender and intercultural competence: Analysis of intercultural competence among upper secondary school students in Denmark and Norway. Educational Psychol. 2020;40(1):120\u0026ndash;40. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2019.1646410\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/01443410.2019.1646410\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStuart-Fox M. Laos in Asean: Dilemmas of development and identity. Asian Stud Rev. 1998;22(2):223\u0026ndash;37. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/10357829808713196\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/10357829808713196\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTang JT, Mo D, Lan WC. Exploring the integration of cooperative learning in blended teaching environments. Educ Inform Technol. 2025. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13791-3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10639-025-13791-3\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eThi Ngu D. (2022). \u003cem\u003eAnalysis of noun errors of Lao international students when learning Vietnamese\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.47750/jett.2022.13.05.018\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.47750/jett.2022.13.05.018\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTondok MS, Suryanto S, Ardi R. Building Bridges in Diverse Societies: A Meta-Analysis of Field Experimental Cooperative Learning Studies on Intergroup Relations in Educational Settings. Societies. 2024;14(11). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/soc14110221\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/soc14110221\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWild S, Neef C. Learning Strategies in Mathematics for Related Study Programs Focusing on Cooperative Education in Germany \u0026ndash; Viewed from the Perspectives of the Academic Disciplines, Economics and Engineering, as well as Gender. Int J Sci Math Educ. 2025;23(5):1237\u0026ndash;58. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-024-10513-y\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s10763-024-10513-y\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Intercultural Competence, Cooperative Learning, Lao students, multi-site, Vietnamese higher education, intervention study","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8710005/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-8710005/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThe context of strategic Vietnam-Laos educational cooperation has led to a large-scale presence of Lao students in universities across all three regions (North, Central, South) of Vietnam, creating de facto multicultural classrooms. However, this mere contact often fails to develop Intercultural Competence (ICC), a core 21st-century skill. This study evaluates the effectiveness of an intentional pedagogical intervention-Cooperative Learning (CL)-in developing ICC for both Vietnamese and Lao students in three different university settings.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe utilized a multi-site quasi-experimental design with control (CG) and experimental (EG) groups (N\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;421) at three universities. Students took a pre-test and post-test for ICC over a 15-week intervention. Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA), with Pre_Score as the covariate, was used to assess the intervention's effectiveness. Quantitative results showed that the CL model had an overwhelmingly positive and highly statistically significant impact (F(1, 414)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;2969.686, p\u0026thinsp;\u0026lt;\u0026thinsp;0.001) on the ICC development of the EG, with an effect size (η\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e) as large as 0.878. More importantly, a statistically significant interaction effect (F(2, 414)\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;5.558, p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.004) was detected, indicating that the intervention's effectiveness was moderated by regional factors, with the effectiveness in the Central region being significantly lower than in the North and South. Qualitative analysis from interviews reinforced these findings, indicating that the CL process helped students \u0026ldquo;Overcome Stereotypes\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;Develop Empathy\u0026rdquo;. The study affirms CL as a highly effective and scalable pedagogical strategy for developing ICC in the Vietnamese-Lao context, while also highlighting the necessity of adjusting implementation based on specific regional-cultural contexts. This study aligns with Sustainable Development Goal 4 (Quality Education) by providing a scalable pedagogical model to foster cultural appreciation and global citizenship skills in higher education.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Efficacy of Cooperative Learning in Enhancing Intercultural Competence via a Multi Site Intervention in Vietnam","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-02-23 13:12:01","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-8710005/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"7af41289-2bfd-4d2c-b7f9-0a6e6ec28a23","owner":[],"postedDate":"February 23rd, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-05-11T13:01:12+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-02-23 13:12:01","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-8710005","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-8710005","identity":"rs-8710005","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}