Cristina Peter- Provacative Pairings

Re-evaluating the Meaning of Internationalization

Do not pass Go, Do Not Collect $200: Re-evaluating the Meaning of Internationalization

in Western Institutions of Higher Education

Cristina Peter

1


Do not pass Go, Do Not Collect $200: Re-evaluating the Meaning of Internationalization

in Western Institutions of Higher Education

The current themes affecting postsecondary institutions are the ever-increasing diversity

of our student population; the growing demand for the preparation of graduates to be global

citizens in the workforce; and the ease and access with which students encounter wide arrays of

culture and knowledge through emerging technology. As our student population becomes

increasingly more diverse, institutional administrators seek ways of better meeting the needs and

supporting the success of all students. Institutions experiencing rapid growth are also tasked with

undergoing rapid change in the delivery and the direction of student support services to continue

to uphold their reputations, not only in their local region, but also in the global market.

When the Bologna Declaration was released in 1999, it emphasized the importance of

student mobility by making cross-institutional transfer easy and accessible for European students

(Valka, 2015). North American institutions quickly followed suit catering to the expectation that

postsecondary institutions across the world could, and should, prepare students for an

increasingly globalized professional world through higher education. Increases in the number of

out-of-country students in institutions have not only altered the postsecondary landscape in

Canada and the United States, but have also brought two main benefits to these postsecondary

systems. First, as government funding declines, institutions have needed to diversify revenue

streams and international students offer institutions a renewed source of income (Bailey, 2005;

Roberts & Dunworth, 2012; Hasio et al, 2015). Second, international students enrich the

diversity of the school population, and introduce new ideas and cultural and educational

experiences for all students (McDonald , 2014)

2


International students have become a crucial element in the attainment of institutional

prestige and financial sustainability, however, there is growing concern that international

students are not receiving the transitional support necessary for success in these

‘internationalized’ institutions. As education becomes increasingly “customer-orientation”,

student support services are an essential “after-sale” service, especially for students who have

paid a higher sticker price. (Hasio et al, 2015; Roberts & Dunworth, 2012) This paper will

review the issues faced by international students, provide the ways in which institutions currently

provide support for their diverse student body, assess the effectiveness of these practices, and

finally propose a paradigm shift which should alter the way institutions and student affairs

professionals view, support, and empower international students.

Issues Faced By International Students

Recent studies on international student success have demonstrated worrisome trends.

While experiences of international students will, of course, vary depending on student age,

national background, gender, and other personal traits, all international students are placed at a

significant disadvantage as they simultaneously encounter academic emotional, cultural, and

social problems (Gebhard, 2012; Ramerhausen, 2013). In comparison to local students,

international students consistently demonstrate greater difficulty adjusting to the academic

requirements of postsecondary institutions due to issues with language proficiency or issues

adapting to the new educational culture (Burns, 1991). In one study, students disclosed that they

only understood 20-30% of lecture materials, while another study cites that students often

struggled with specialized, discipline-related terminology, which greatly affected their

comprehension of material (Brunton & Jeffrey, 2013; Omeri et al, 2003). In addition to

difficulties with language proficiency, interpretation of the education system may vary

3


depending on the culture the student was previously educated in. In some cultures, instructors are

perceived as “all-knowing, transmitters of knowledge” (McDonald, 2014). With this expectation

of their instructors in their new cultural context, student often demonstrate difficulty in the way

the critically engage with material, and are often confused and anxious about class participation

and grading mechanisms which assess these areas (McDonald, 2014; Gebhard, 2012; Omeri et

al, 2003). In Robertson et. al. (2000), postsecondary instructors corroborated these difficulties

stating that international students appeared ‘less worldly’ in their contributions, were reluctant to

give their personal opinion, and demonstrated different attitudes towards learning due to the

alternative educational practices they were accustomed to (Robertson et. al., 2000) In addition to

these academic issues, 78% of international students indicated that overarching anxiety about

academic performance significantly affected their academic studies (Burns, 1991)

While international students demonstrate feelings of under-preparedness for academic

study, they demonstrate feelings of lack of familiarity with social rules, which limits their

interactions with other students (Burns, 1991). Work by Terrazas-Carrillo et al. (2015) argues

that international students undergo a radical change in their ‘place identity’, which has drastic

and limiting effects on social performance, the way they interpret meaningful experiences, and

perception of self-identity (Terrazas-Carrillo et la. 2015). With limited sense of belonging,

disruptions in self-identity, and difficulty interacting with other students, many international

students experience feelings of loneliness and depression (Brunton & Jeffrey, 2013) Lack of

integration, however, is not a conscious choice: international students often assumed domestic

students were unfriendly, had difficulty approaching or connecting with local groups, or found it

difficult to engage in extra curricular social activities because of limited time due to the need for

academic preparation or part time jobs (Burns, 1991; Bailey, 2005). Academic and social issues

4


are further compounded in some cases by familial pressure for students to do well, especially in

cases where families and friends of students have used all financial resources available to them

to send students to university (Burns, 1991).

As the population of students pursuing postsecondary education abroad increases, global

trends in data demonstrate that international students experience unique stressors, including

limited language proficiency, racial and ethnic discrimination, changes in cultural values,

financial problems, loneliness, anxiety about failure, and familial pressure. (Ramerhausen, 2013;

Hasio et al., 2015; Reynolds & Constantine, 2007; Sherry et al., 2010) These academic, social,

and cultural stressors have significant short-term impacts on the student experience while the

students are at the institution, but also affect the long-term decision-making process for

international students. Many international students initially travel abroad with the intention of

exploring other cultures, attending prestigious and world-renowned institutions, and receiving

the educational basis for their future career goals (Reynolds & Constantine, 2007). Research

suggests, however, that less-than-positive postsecondary experiences can prevent international

students from focusing on these aspirations or expecting positive career outcomes (Reynolds &

Constantine, 2007). While international students enter institutions with excitement for their

future studies and life after graduation, there appear to be a number of barriers and obstacles that

diminish their experience and limit their future goals and intentions.

In some cases, students find ways of individually coping. Gebhard (2012) identified sense

of humour, reminders of home culture, interacting with supportive peers (both domestic and

international students), and the use of observation and imitation of local students as successful

coping strategies for out-of-country students (Gebhard, 2012). Bailey’s findings (2005) echo

Gerhard’s work demonstrating that co-national buddy programs (that is, international students

5


associating with students from their home culture) are a means of providing students with

practical help, shared cultural values, reminders of home, and emotional support. These

programs, however, have limitations as they often reduce the amount of time students spend

improving their local language proficiency and can lead to group conformity, making it difficult

for international students to meet local students (Bailey, 2005). While students can and do find

ways of coping and persisting to complete their international degree, institutions have recognized

the importance of institutional support to enhance the student experience.

How Institutions Support International Students

Institutional Supports

With the increasing institutional awareness of the responsibility to support the unique

needs of international students, multiple forms of advice and support have been provided,

spanning 3 broad areas: cognitive, affective, and systemic (Roberts & Dunworth, 2012). A

recent trend in American Institutions is to offer incoming international students a formal

introductory handbook that describes the western education system and culture in great detail

(Ramerhausen, 2013). Other institutions provide on campus services and programming such as

additional orientation sessions, language learning support, or counselling for international

students.

Despite the wide range of resources offered by institutions to specifically support

international students, there is an indication that staff and students are not operating within the

same perspective in terms of what this support should look like. Data on usage of institutional

supports by international students suggest that international students are less likely to use mental

health, academic or career counseling, even when readily available (Roberts & Dunworth, 2012;

Reynolds & Constantine, 2007; Hasio et al., 2015; Hwang et al.). In a study of international

6


students and institutional staff, staff suggested that student use of services was low because

students did not understand what services were for, how they could be accessed, or when to use

the service. Students, on the other hand, disclosed that they were not even aware of the full range

of services. (Roberts & Dunworth, 2012) Similarly, staff believed that service location was not

central enough, however students stated that while location was central, information on resources

was not available in times of need and there was limited access to services when they were

required (Roberts & Dunworth, 2012). Finally, students stated that staff were often unaware of

the unique range of services available for international students and often students felt

misguided, or that they had missed important information or opportunities which could have

enhanced their experience (Roberts & Dunworth, 2012).

The initial access to institutional supports is also problematic for international students.

In some cases, international students are concerned with the confidentiality of services that are

provided and are hesitant to utilize services in case information about their needs is shared with

family members. While international students are more likely to access support services if they

are referred, the best way of referring students to service is through authority figures such as

professors and staff. Using staff referrals as a best practice in enhancing student access to

supports, however, is problematic as students often do not feel comfortable speaking to superiors

about their problems as they do not know the consequences of these conversations (McDonald,

2014; Hwang et al.)

Peer Support

A growing area of development in supporting international students is in providing peer

support (Reynolds & Constantine, 2007; Burns 1991) In the case of accessing social supports,

students have identified that they feel the need for staff and lecturers to assist them socially in

7


meeting other students (Bartram, 2007). While many institutional staff members do not identify

assistance in social support as a role they can play, some institutional programs have been

established which informally or formally connect students with peers to encourage the

development of a social network and feeling of belonging. In some cases, the peer supports are

other international students so that students can engage in community with people from a similar

cultural background (Sherry et al., 2010; Bartram, 2007; Gebhard, 2012; Burns, 1991; Reynolds

& Constantine, 2007) These programs are modelled after the positive coping mechanisms

identified by Bailey, however, these programs have both benefits and limitations. In other

alternative programs, international students are connected with domestic students in buddy

programs to enhance integration and help students’ transition to a new environment with help

from a knowledgeable peer (Brunton & Jeffrey, 2013)

While these peer programs attempt to enhance sense of belonging and social networking

for international students these programs, they, like the institutional support services, do not

seem to be working. In a report by the Canada Bureau of International Education, over half of

international students indicated that did not have any domestic friends, which for many

international students, is one of the main reasons they have travelled abroad for education (CBIE,

2015). While institutions are motivated to continue to increase international student populations

on campuses, administrators are becoming increasingly aware of the diverse support needs of

international students and the seemingly inadequate response support services have provided.

Shifting Our Perspective

As institutions pride themselves on the achievement of their goals of internationalization

with the increases in the number of international students, it is important to recognize that simply

increasing international numbers does not internationalize an institution. One of the basic tenants

8


of internationalization was not to merely increase student mobility (and the added funding that

came with it), but to increase the impact of this mobility. International students pursue studies in

other countries to explore another culture, learn new ways of thinking, make new friends and

improve cross-cultural understanding; however, do we expect the same from our local students,

staff and faculty (Sherry et al., 2010)? How can we expect one group to achieve “intercultural

learning” unless we expect this learning to be reciprocal among all our students? From an

educators perspective, why would we have alternative learning outcomes for some students and

not others? In adapting education to meet the needs of diverse students in a classroom, it is not

the learning outcomes that should be changed, but the means of achieving them that are adapted.

In many North American institutions, administrators have focused on the international

students as if they are issues that need to be “fixed” rather than truly understanding the diversity

and value that these students bring. There are 5 stages of cultural integration that offer a

framework with which to understand how our institutions interact with students of diverse

cultural backgrounds, including both international and domestic students. The first stage is

“denial”, in which individuals fail to recognize any difference between themselves and diverse

individuals. The second stage is “defense”, in which individuals acknowledge difference but

view this difference from their own culture as negative. In the third stage, individuals engage in

“minimization”. Minimization occurs when individuals view their dominant culture as superior

to other diverse groups. In the fourth stage of “adaptation”, individuals adapt to cultural

difference while simultaneously maintaining their own cultural values. It is only in the final stage

of true cultural “integration” that individuals shift their perspectives from one culture to another

in a natural way (Sawir, 2011).

9


Based on the methods previous described and the hurried attempts of institutions to “fix”

the international student experience, I argue that we reside in the third stage of “minimization”,

acknowledging difference but viewing our own culture as superior- and there are data that prove

it. In a study of teaching faculty opinions around international student support, 70% of staff

reported valuing cultural differences however one-third 1/3 did not change their teaching strategy

and 1/8 of staff stated they treated all students equally, regardless of cultural background. The

study did not indicate how staff changed their teaching strategy if they did change it. While

instructors were aware of and appreciative of difference, they still indicate confusion as to how

to engage productively with difference (Sawir, 2011).

Institutions and their members minimize the experiences and backgrounds of their

students and assume that international students need to adapt to the higher education system they

enter, therefore, the resources that we provide often focus on explaining how the western

education system works (Kelly, et al, 2012). While adaptation can be productive for practical

questions like ‘how to use public transit’ or ‘purchase a cell phone’, institutional strategies have

emphasized the need for adaption to all elements of the international experience, including the

education system. In one of the transitional introductory handbooks previously mentioned as a

resource for international students, the text reads, “to succeed in it (the US Academic System),

you will need to learn how it is organized and how it works” (Ramerhausen, 2013). Student

interpretations of their education align with the handbook’s advice, as two-thirds of students feel

that courses took on a western approach (Bailey, 2005). These strategies leave relatively little

room for cross-cultural learning.

In our quest to support international students, institutions do not take the time to

understand culture or consider diverse background. A Polish student suggests “I think that there

10


should be group meetings so we can share our culture with Americans and other international

students.”(Sherry et al., 2010; Bailey, 2005). Isn’t this what internationalization is? Why are we

wasting the valuable resource of our student body by treating international students as if they

have deficit rather than an asset? There is limited value added by international students who are

expected to adapt to an already formed system; this is merely an exercise in adaptation rather

than internalization (Kelly, et al, 2012)

Internationalization of the curriculum is not simply designing accommodations for

international students to better adapt to the institutional tradition (Sawir, 2013). Haigh

articulately observes “they (international students) that are placed in a game where only locals

know the rules” (Haigh, 2014). We can best support international students issues, if we better

understand and appreciate students rather than fix them; if we change the game, rather than teach

them the rules. All the supports listed in this paper focus on viewing international students from

a perspective of deficit rather than asset. If we were to leverage the unique experiences of

international students, not only would we support and appreciate their experience, but we also

would empower local students to explore and exchange knowledge and experiences. It is only

when there is willingness on behalf of the institution to learn about their students and facilitate

learning between these students that the laudable goal of internationalization can begin.

11


References

Bailey, C. (2005). Supporting international students in UK Higher Education: key issues, and

recommendations for further research. University of Wolverhampton: Teaching and

Learning Projects. Retreived from: http://wlv.openrepository.com/wlv/handle/2436/7590

Bartram, B. (2007). The sociocultural needs of international students in higher education: A

comparison of staff and student views. Journal of Studies in International Education,

11(2), 205-214.

Burns, R. B. (1991). Study and stress among first year overseas students in an Australian

university. Higher Education Research & Development, 10(1), 61-77.

Brunton, M., & Jeffrey, L. (2014). Identifying factors that influence the learner empowerment of

international students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations,

doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2014.10.003

Canadian Bureau from International Education (CBIE). (2015). The Integration Challenge:

Connecting International Students with their Canadian peers. CBIE Research in Brief #2.

Retrieved from: http://www.cbie-bcei.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/FINAL-CBIE-

Research-in-Brief-2-The-Integration-Challenge-EN.pdf

Gebhard, J. G., EdD. (2012). International students' adjustment problems and behaviors. Journal

of International Students, 2(2), 184-193.

Haigh, M. (2014). From internationalisation to education for global citizenship: A Multi‐

Layered history. Higher Education Quarterly, 68(1), 6-27.

Hsiao-ping, W., Garza, E., & Guzman, N. (2015). International student's challenge and

12

http://www.cbie-bcei.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/FINAL-CBIE-Research-in-Brief-2-The-Integration-Challenge-EN.pdf

http://www.cbie-bcei.ca/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/FINAL-CBIE-Research-in-Brief-2-The-Integration-Challenge-EN.pdf


adjustment to college. Education Research International, ,

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/202753

Hwang, B. J., P.H.D., Bennett, R., M.S.W., & Beauchemin, J., M.S.W. (2014). International

Students’ Utilization of Couseling Services. College Student Journal, 48(3), 347-354.

Kelly, P., & Moogan, Y. (2012). Culture shock and higher education performance: Implications

for teaching. Higher Education Quarterly, 66(1), 24-46.

McDonald, I. (2014). Supporting international students in UK higher education institutions.

Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 18(2), 62-65.

Omeri, A., Malcolm, P., Ahern, M., & Wellington, B. (2003). Meeting the challenges of cultural

diversity in the academic setting. Nurse Education in Practice, 3(1), 5-22.

Reynolds, A., & Constantine, M. (2007). Cultural adjustment difficulties and career development

of international college students. Journal of Career Assessment, 15(3), 338-350.

Roberts, P., & Dunworth, K. (2012). Staff and student perceptions of support services for

international students in higher education: A case study. Journal of Higher Education

Policy and Management, 34(5), 517-528.

Robertson, M., Line, M., Jones, S., & Thomas, S. (2000). International students, learning

environments and perceptions: A case study using the delphi technique. Higher

Education Research & Development, 19(1), 89-102.

Romerhausen, N. J., PhD. (2013). Strategies to enhance student success: A discourse analysis of

academic advice in international student handbooks. Journal of International Students,

3(2), 129-139.

Sawir, E. (2011). Dealing with diversity in internationalised higher education institutions.

Intercultural Education, 22(5), 381-394.

13


Sawir, E. (2013). Internationalisation of higher education curriculum: The contribution of

international students. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 11(3), 359-378.

Sherry, M., Thomas, P., & Chui, W. (2010). International students: A vulnerable student

population. Higher Education, 60(1), 33-46. D

Terrazas-Carrillo, E. C. & Hong, J. Y. & Pace, T. M.(2014). Adjusting to New Places:

International Student Adjustment and Place Attachment. Journal of College Student

Development 55(7), 693-706.

Valka, S. (2015). Management of International Students’ Academic Adjustment: Challenges and

Solutions. European Scientific Journal 3, 161-169.

14

Documents

Cristina Peter- Provacative Pairings