2015

How international is the international education at UCN?

Pilot study

What inequalities in relation to learning and social support exist between international and Danish students? by Anna Hammershøy and Berit Simonsen

The report has been prepared by: Berit E. Simonsen and Anna Hammershøy

1.

Preface The report, which constitutes Part 1 (of 2), is a comprehensive analysis of the state-of-theart literature within internationalization of education. The analysis is centered around the major challenges in terms of adapting a Danish curriculum to an international context as well as on the development of a supportive learning environment for all students. The aim of the study is to establish evidence for the relevance of a research project from a user perspective, which is planned to take place in 2016-2017. Using the theoretical findings from this report, Part 2 thus constitutes the primary data-gathering of the overall pilot study which is to be completed by the end of 2015.

University College Nordjylland

2/38

2.

Table of contents

1. 2. 2.1 2.2

Preface .......................................................................................................................................... 2 Table of contents ....................................................................................................................... 3 Purpose ........................................................................................................................................................ 4 Background for researching the area in UCN context................................................................ 7

3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 8.1 8.2

Research question...................................................................................................................10 Research traditions ................................................................................................................10 Research design .......................................................................................................................12 Part 1: State-of-the-art literature ......................................................................................12 Internationalisation ...............................................................................................................13 Learning......................................................................................................................................16 Structure and Agency .......................................................................................................................... 18 Personal and social identity.............................................................................................................. 19

9. 9.1 9.2

Culture.........................................................................................................................................21 Personal agency..................................................................................................................................... 24 Socialization and social support ..................................................................................................... 31

10.

References .................................................................................................................................34

University College Nordjylland

3/38

2.1

Purpose

Internationalisation has been an increasingly popular topic for Danish universities during the last decade. Vinther and Slethaug (2015) quote Keeling on the subject of internationalising the education strategies in the EU: “The Bologna Process is an intergovernmental commitment to restructuring higher education systems which extends far beyond the EU and the Lisbon Strategy is part of the Union’s wider economic platform that extends beyond the higher education sector. In combination, these European-level actions are supporting and stabilizing an emergent policy framework for the EU in higher education” (Vinther & Slethaug, 2015, p.94) In a Danish context, it has been noted that any “self-respecting” Danish university has either implemented or is in the process of implementing an internationalisation strategy (Mortensen, Haberland & Fabricius, 2012). This line of thought is further mirrored by the fact that in the academic year 2012-2013 an estimated 30,000 international students were studying in Denmark, which is a fivefold increase compared to the numbers for the year 2000 (DAMVAD, 2013). This international movement of students, who often stem from poorer countries and travel abroad to obtain qualifications in more affluent countries, has truly transformed higher education into a global phenomenon in many respects, recognizing a radical increase in cross-national flows of teaching staff and students, knowledge and ideas. As such, for the first time in history we can talk about “the university” in terms of not just a national field but a global field (Marginson & Sawir, 2011). This shift is further driven by dramatic technological advances, most notably in the area of networked communications and computer power, but also in the availability of relatively cheap air travel (Case, 2013, p. 18). As stated above, Denmark is currently experiencing a massive growth in the number of international students choosing to study in the country. However, as argued by Marginson and Sawir (2011), the growth in student mobility is not only a western Anglophone phenomenon. Higher education in South Asia is also experiencing an increase in international students. At the same time we are witnessing the first results of a very recent

University College Nordjylland

4/38

development in the form of MOOCs – Massive Open Online Content- which is argued to have potential to be the real “game changer” (Marginson, 2012 as cited in Case, 2014) in the field of higher education. These developments naturally have the potential to provide a strong challenge to Western ideas on higher education, and can be seen as a significant structural change that has brought with it a wake of challenges and possibilities, with one key issue being that the traditional means whereby society has funded higher education have generally been strained (Case, 2013). As such, currently, education and research seem to be the answer to a variety of growth and productivity issues (Andersen & Jacobsen, 2012; Case, 2013; Killick, 2015). Marginson (2006) identifies the drivers: “Intensified status competition, locking neatly into neo-liberal government, is reconstituting the field of higher education (Bordieu,1988) as a competitive market in private status goods. This, not a structural transformation consequent on changes in scale, is decisive” (Marginson 2006, p.18 as cited in Case, 2014) Killick (2015) further identifies two facets of the marketization of higher education: 1. One concerned with selling itself to prospective students (and sponsors) in the competitive arenas of both national and international marketplaces; and 2. Another concerned with defining its purpose around meeting the needs of the employer (the market for its graduates) (Killick, 2015, p. 14) With respect to the latter, Killick argues that it is the employability and corporate interests, not society at large or the students themselves, that have become a significant definer of the purposes which drive higher education. Following this vein of thought, Case (2013) introduces the work of the American philosopher Martha Nussbaum who presented a trenchant criticism of a narrow conception of the purposes of higher education, linking education too closely to employability, and economic growth too closely to the broad social well-being (in Case, 2013, p. 19). Drawing on the work of Sen, Nussbaum thus advocates for a broader understanding of the relationship between higher education and human development, crucially she argues that a view of national progress that focuses solely on e.g. average Gross Domestic Product (GDP) can mask massive inequities in society (Nussbaum, 2010 in Case, 2013, p. 19).

University College Nordjylland

5/38

As mentioned before, the substantial increase in participation in higher education in individual countries and globally, as well as a more diverse student composition represent a significant structural change. As such, this has raised questions about what might be assumed as reasonable preparation and what challenges contemporary students will face when having to understand and adjust to the knowledge demands of university study. This in return is largely driven by the individual educational institution and how each institution understands internationalization and which internationalization models it creates and utilizes. In light of this it seems valuable to draw on the earlier internationalisation experiences in countries such as the UK, the USA and Australia who placed a strong, often exclusive focus on international student recruitment (Killick, 2015). This focus hence effectively divorced internationalisation from the interests and engagement of academic staff and at times alienated those concerned with providing a quality learning experience to their students, as “floods” of international students appeared in classrooms with no immediate attention having been given to the impacts this radical change in campus cultural demographics, international and educational dynamics (Luke, 2010 p.48 in Killick, 2015, p.20) might have had on academic practices, cohesion, retention, workloads etc. Such a focus on student recruitment and on for-profit international students’ recruitment has further led to the continuing shifts toward English-medium delivery, or as “a course taught in English”. In light of the latter, the massive increase of international students in Denmark could illustrate such a focus on “for-profit international student recruitment” which in turn leads to the importance of questioning the actual purposes of higher education as well as examining the content of the various institutions model for internationalisation. Therefore, if higher education institutions in Denmark are to prevail in the competition from e.g. South Asian markets and the alleged game-changer, MOOCs, it seems unlikely that this will be possible by merely offering “courses taught in English”. De Witt (2012) in Killick (2015) hence points to a tendency to confuse or conflate the means with the ends of internationalisation and lists nine myths in which this confusion is manifested. In these myths internationalisation thus means: 

Education in the English language;



Studying or staying abroad;

University College Nordjylland

6/38



An international subject [i.e. international content];



Having many international students;



Having few international students guarantees success;



No need to test intercultural and international competencies;



The more partnerships the more international;



Higher education is international by nature;



Internationalisation as a precise goal (meaning that internationalisation is in itself only a means to achieve our ambitions for a higher education appropriate in the twenty-first century).

As Killick argues, many of these means might be appropriate mechanisms to advance the goals of internationalisation; however they lack one overall focus, namely what happens beyond recruitment?

2.2

Background for researching the area in UCN context

University College of Northern Denmark (UCN) currently offers a number of international study fields, for example within Business and Technology studies, Education and Social Studies and Health Studies, as well as a number of different programs, e.g. a full time 2 year Academic Professional (AP) programme and a full time PBA degree (both as a 1 ½ year topup programme and a 3 to 4 year programme) (University College Nordjylland, 2014). The overall aim at institution level is described as follows: “[…] to stand out as one of the leading international university colleges and as a recognizable European university college – a university of applied sciences” (UCN, 2014). The present pilot study focuses on one of these programmes offering an AP degree in Service Management, where the students can choose to specialise in Hotel and Restaurant Management, Tourism management or Sport and Event management (hereafter referred to as the Study program). Within the Study program, the education is being offered in two

University College Nordjylland

7/38

streams, Danish (with Danish as the teaching medium) and international (with English as the teaching medium). The international stream is subject to the same curriculum as the Danish stream (UCN being a public educational institution, the curriculum is nation-wide and designed by the Danish Ministry of Education, with only insignificant variations possible). The overall increase in international student numbers in Denmark as described previously, is also mirrored in the number of international students in the Study program: roughly 50% of the students follow the international stream. The overwhelming majority of these students fall under the definition of international students, who for the purpose of this investigation are defined according to Vinther and Slethaug (2015): “[…] all students “who have their pre-university qualification from a country other than their tertiary place of study” (p. 98). As per January 2015, out of 156 undergraduates enrolled in the international stream, only ten were of Danish origin and spoke Danish (internal UCN statistics). With regards to the composition of the international students in the Study Program, they primarily originate from Central and Eastern Europe and the Baltic countries, namely: Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, Slovakia, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia (internal UCN statistics).

The high intake of International students at UCN indicate a focus on “for-profit international student recruitment” and it therefore seems likely that UCN is facing some of the challenges and opportunities such focus entails, i.e. the radical changes in international and educational dynamics and the impact this might have on academic practices, cohesion, retention, and workloads, both from the viewpoints of international students and the lecturers. In an earlier research by Tange and Jensen (2012) it is suggested that: ”[…]as international students move into educational cultures that are framed by specific national and/or institutional histories, this increases their risk of misunderstanding, marginalization and academic failure (p. 182) These suggestions are strengthened by issues the researchers themselves have observed and previously researched in the domain of international education in the Study Programme (e.g. Hammershøy 2014a, 2014b). Findings from this research illustrate that overall, the discourse

University College Nordjylland

8/38

about international students among teachers at UCN shows that they experience some challenges connected with teaching this group of students (Hammershøy, 2014a). At the same time, internal statistics show a higher frequency for international students to use multiple attempts in order to pass examinations. Moreover, the international students demonstrate a lower grade point average (GPA) in their final examinations than their Danish counterparts (internal UCN statistics). It therefore seems valuable to further investigate the mechanisms of internationalisation at UCN in an attempt to elucidate the underpinning reasons for such grade discrepancies and discourses as presented above. The overall aim is hence to improve on the quality of intercultural education and to offer new ideas for how to view the cultural “other” (Marginson & Sawir, 2011), as well as to address the question of how the international students at UCN can graduate better equipped to function in a global world (Killick, 2015).

If UCN is to fully develop as one of the “leading international university colleges and as a recognizable European university college” (UCN, 2014), we propose, based in the notions presented hitherto, that the focus of the educational institution must go beyond the recruitment process. We will therefore attempt to identify and map the experiences of our international students as well the experiences of the lecturers teaching these students, as these findings might ultimately aid in the creation and enhancement of a positive learning experience for both parties. This dual perspective goes beyond the majority of scholars who examine the question of internationalisation mainly from the position of the students. Our reasoning for choosing a wider ranging focus is inspired by such scholars as Tange and Jensen (2012), Marginson and Sawir (2011) and Vinther and Slethaug (2015) who all share our conviction that it is equally important to consider the situation on the receiving side. As suggested by both Hammershøy (2014a) and Tange and Jensen (2010, 2012) the attention of lecturers is often drawn to a native/non-native distinction, which is found to encourage stereotyping. This is especially critical, as the lecturers are (along with the rest of the faculty) responsible for the socialisation of non-native students into a new academic system, and at the same time, for the evaluation of their performance (Tange & Jensen, 2012, p. 182). Therefore, the key concepts we are addressing throughout our investigation and research are quality of education and equal opportunities for learning for all the students. In light of

University College Nordjylland

9/38

this, inequality (chanceulighed in Danish) is understood as a distinction between the two student cohorts (Danish and international) in structure as well as in discourse, meaning that we do not fully utilize and recognize the potential the international students possess. The purpose of this Pilot study is to address these issues in the context of the AP programme in Service management (the Study Programme), and based on the obtained results, hopefully replicate the study across the different international educations and programs offered at UCN.

3.

Research question

Based on the above, we have identified the following research question which will guide us in the Pilot study: What inequalities in relation to learning and social support exist between international and Danish students?

4.

Research traditions

The role of discourse in teaching and learning in higher education has historically tended to draw on the work of various postmodern theorists, such as Gee (1999) (Crawford & Wright, 2010) and other representatives of the New Literacy Studies movement. A relative newcomer to practitioners in the arena of teaching and learning is critical realism, with the work of Clegg (2003, 2009) and Kahn (2009) being examples (in Crawford & Wright, 2010). For this reason, the perspectives it can offer are either widely unknown or not well understood (Ibid.). However, as argued by Case (2014), critical realism offers a “broad ontological and methodological framing for social research” as the social realist approach to education research focuses on the ‘context’ and in doing so, offers a much fuller understanding of how context impacts and conditions the interactions between teaching and learning, than for example, concentrating only on ‘learning approaches’ or ‘assessment’. As opposed to the social constructivist approach, in critical realism the shift from incidents to mechanisms directs the attention to what produces or generates incidents and as such not merely the incidents alone. This means that a critical realist emphasizes the ontological University College Nordjylland

10/38

question of: How is reality created and how do we gain knowledge about it? , whereas the idealistic and constructivist tradition emphasizes the epistemological question: How is knowledge possible? (Bhaskar, 1975) Although the ontology is realistic, Bhaskar (1989) argues that the position in critical realism is transcendental realism, meaning that it considers knowledge objects as the structures and mechanisms that generate phenomena and knowledge produced in the social activity of science (Ibid.), thus placing the ontology as a third position within realism. Knowledge in critical realism is considered a socially and historically constructed product and as such relativistic. A central feature in realism, according to English sociologist Andrew Sayer (1992) is the perception of fallibility. Knowledge of the world is fallible and theory-laden. The concepts of true or false are not able to offer a coherent view on the relation between knowledge and its objective (Ibid., p.5). Through this process, he argues, it is possible to develop reliable knowledge and also to achieve progress in knowledge. The fact that reality is believed to exist regardless of our knowledge of it also means that this reality can be subject to analysis, also known as the intransitive object (Buch-Hansen & Peter, 2005). The purpose of science is thus to come as close to this reality as possible. This knowledge is constituted by our theories and notions about it and these combined constitute our transitive object, which is socially determined and changeable (Buch-Hansen & Peter, 2005). The understanding is that theory can change, but the intransitive object remains consistent. This critical realist orientation towards reality in general - and social reality in particular thus implies a tendency for critical realist research to recognize the complexity and differential practice with regard to the development of discourses in higher education (Crawford & Wright, 2010). It thus provides a broad way of thinking and understanding that enhances empirical research, but allows the construction of specific theories to emerge from the research topic (Cruickshank, 2007, p. 3; Danermark et al., 2002, p.162 in Crawford & Wright, 2010). The relativism of this naturally implies that there must be reservations to the

University College Nordjylland

11/38

preliminary conclusions drawn in this investigation as there is no universal truth but rather different conclusions made probable through reasoning and rational judgment.

5.

Research design

This Pilot study is composed of two parts: 1. Secondary research which uncovers state-of-the-art literature within the area of international education 2. Primary research using a case study design. Qualitative data will be collected in the form of non-participant observation of classes, individual interviews and focus group interviews with relevant students and lecturers. Also, quantitative data in the form of questionnaires distributed among students and lecturers will be collected. The key concepts behind this Pilot study are internationalisation of the education, quality and equal opportunities in international education and social mobility. These concepts helped to guide the review of contemporary research and literature within this area. The research of the state-of-the-art literature led us to development of the themes which we in return intend to explore in our case study through observations, focus groups, interviews and subsequent questionnaires.

6.

Part 1: State-of-the-art literature

The practical and theoretical orientation as presented in section 1.2. led to the following critical review of the existing research in the field. As such, this state-of-the-art literature research is completed on the basis of a search for journal articles and books, primarily published between 2000-2015, although earlier conceptual works with regards to critical realism, cross-cultural adjustment and other fundamental concepts were addressed. Relatively little literature was found that related directly to international students studying in Denmark, and virtually none that related directly to the level of university colleges or universities of applied science. For this reason, studies from other countries have also been included, however their findings have been considered with respect to how they might apply to the Danish context. A large number of articles and books have been reviewed and subsequently

University College Nordjylland

12/38

interpreted in order to draw preliminary conclusions on which the basis for the empirical data gathering has been developed. The literature research has been divided in themes (depicted in figure 1), each theme ending with our chosen conceptualization and conclusion on which we form the basis for the empirical data gathering.

1. Internationalisa tion

2.

3.

Learning

Culture

2.1

2.2

Structure and agency

Personal and social identity

3.2 3.1 Personal agency

Socialisation and social support

Figure 1: Themes defined based on state-of-the-art literature research

7.

Internationalisation

Internationalization is not a new concept in the field of higher education. What is relatively new however is the shape and purpose of internationalisation, an area that has undergone many changes, as outlined previously. As early as in 1998, Josef Mestenhauser argued that if we are to internationalise the curriculum we will need to challenge both the nature of the curriculum and the paradigms on which it is based (p.21 in Hellsten & Reid, 2008). This section hence highlights

University College Nordjylland

13/38

some of the contemporary issues and ideas associated with internationalisation of the curriculum. As internationalisation in higher education sector is a much debated and diversely interpreted concept, numerous definitions have been developed and elaborated over the years making it a familiar term, but also a rather difficult one to work with, as it is subjected to extensive and varied usage in research and discussions about international education and globalisation in higher education. As such, Cambridge and Thompson (2004) refer to it as the international development aid and the transfer of expertise between national systems of education. Crossley and Watson (2003) argue that it is the international school movement that prepares students for employment anywhere in the world, while Teekens (2003, in Marginson & Sawir, 2014) suggests that it has to do with student mobility as in foreign exchange students. As outlined by De Witt (2012) in section 1.2 “Purpose”, many of the various definitions and conceptualisations of the concept can be encompassed under the “umbrella” of the nine myths, in which the confusion is manifest. In an attempt to simplify the term, Marginson and Sawir (2011) understand the concepts of international and internationalisation as neutral spatial descriptors, which they argue is the most common approach in both social sciences and popular usage (p.17). Hence, international refers to a movement or relationship between nations, it does not presume anything about the contents or significance of the relationship. Internationalisation in turn means any process of creating or enhancing cross-national relations, movements or comparisons (Ibid). The advantage of this definition, they argue, is that instead of using internationalisation as a synonym or container for e.g. “global” or “intercultural”, both terms are used in a direct manner with the definitions that follow (Ibid). The idea that such a generic and objective definition can prove valuable is also argued in defence of one of the most commonly cited definitions of internationalisation, put forward by Jane Knight (2003): “[…] the process of integrating an international, intercultural or global dimension into the purpose, functions or delivery of post-secondary education” (p.2). As a response to claims that this definition is too generic, Knight argues that a definition needs to be so easily adjustable and objective that it can be used to describe a phenomenon

University College Nordjylland

14/38

that is in fact universal, but which has different purposes and outcomes, depending on the context in which it is used (Ibid., p.3 ). Killick (2015) contests the simplicity of this argument, but acknowledges the fact that this definition and defence thereof help illustrate the fact that internationalisation is a highly complex and comprehensive process and one that is not easily delegated to any individual area of a given institution (p.22). Both Killick and Leask (in Hellsten & Reid, 2008) further adress the theme of globalisation as well as the theme of intercultural competence (which will be elaborated in a following section), as these two common themes of relevance have emerged in the discussions about internationalisation. Leask (Ibid.) thus purports that it is virtually impossible to discuss internationalisation without referring to globalisation. What is interesting in this aspect is how the concept of internationalisation is viewed in relation to globalisation. Leask (Ibid.) quotes Giddens (1999) who claims that internationalisation is a positive response to globalisation and yet others argue that it is seen as a reaction and response to the forces of globalisation rather than as a contributor. The definition of globalisation in this sense is hence a very important contributor to how internationalisation is conceptualised, thus supporting the argument of Knight, when she defines the concept in generic and objective terms. Killick (2015) offers a new perspective on the various understandings of internationalisation and the approach to globalisation when he presents the research of Canadian tertiary institutions carried out by Bond, who identified three distinct approaches to internationalisation of curriculum (IOC): the add-on approach, the infusion approach and the transformative approach. The latter approach requires a shift in “[…] how faculty and students think about the world and their place in it” (Bond, 2003 in Killick, 2015, p. 26). This shift is described by Killick as “transformative” learning, and as such it demands a focus on the contents of the curriculum and even more importantly a focus on “the learning experience; what is it that students do, and the challenges which they face as they construct and enact their learning” (Ibid.) In continuation of this, Killick propose two dimensions to help the aspirations of IOC – inclusivity and global relevance (Ibid). Globalisation hence drives the need for inclusivity with their own commercial impulses that, according to Marginson & Sawir (2011) have pushed the higher education systems beyond their capacity and willingness to respond (p.7) as well as directly impacts the makeup of the various university populations affecting the ability and conditions for i.e. providing quality learning

University College Nordjylland

15/38

experience. Class diversity also provides sites for significant learning related to inclusivity as well as to the second dimension of IOC, global relevance, as globalisation, argues Killick (2015), impacts directly the students’ needs to be able to understand and apply their disciplinary knowledge (Ibid., p.27). Based on the above arguments, Killick proposes the following definition of internationalisation: “[…] A complex set of processes which are identified by and incorporated into the activities of an individual institution through which all its students experience their subject as globally situated, their peers as equals, and perspectives as always challengeable, and graduates as global selves, with the confidence and the capabilities to make their way among diverse others on the basis of a critical awareness of the impacts of their actions” (Killick, 2015, p. 33). Believing with Killick, among others, that internationalisation is a set of responses to the complexities of globalisation, we will use this definition as the backdrop of our further research.

8.

Learning

As our attention in this pilot study focuses on quality of and inequality in student learning the following is themed around the overall concept of learning. As with internationalisation and globalisation, numerous definitions of learning have been put forward throughout time. Wittrock (1977) defines learning as: “the processes involved in changing through experience” (in Benitez, 2001, p.293). Major (2005) describes learning as a “holistic process, crucially involving the self-awareness of the learner” (in Killick, 2015, p.124) and purports that: “[…] learning is best achieved in collaboration with others”. With regards to understanding the concept of learning, the critical realist approach applied in this pilot study, partially originates from the postulations of social constructivism, i.e. that learning is a social activity and thereby always presupposes a social context. Kastberg and Tange (2014) summarize the social constructivist understanding of learning by referring to it as an active personal and social process of constructing knowledge. One of the most influential figures in the social constructivist theory of learning is Lev Vygotsky, who defined learning as a socially mediated experience and the learner’s development as an

University College Nordjylland

16/38

internalisation of social experience (Pritchard, 2014, pp. 31-32). Another renowned scholar of learning is Jean Piaget, who agreed with Vygotsky that individuals actively construct their own knowledge and understanding. However, whereas Vygotsky stressed the importance of the social interaction in which an individual interacts, Piaget stressed the inner motivation to balance new information with existing knowledge and understanding (Pritchard, 2014, p. 131). This understanding purposed by Piaget that children basically operate as “lone scientists” is however widely criticized. As such, yet another significant scholar of learning in a social constructivist perspective, Dewey (1916, 1966), suggests that “isolation of subject matter from a social context is the chief obstruction in current practice to securing a general training of mind” (in Killick, 2015, p. 26). Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger have contributed to this line of thought with their concept of “communities of practice” (CoP), which can be viewed as “a social learning system” (Wenger E. , 1998; Wenger, 2009).Wenger further argues that the learner, being a social participant, constructs his or her identity in the process of meaning-making. Moreover, the learner cannot be constrained to a mere cognitive entity, it is “[…]a whole person, with a body, a heart, a brain, relationships, aspirations, all the aspects of human experience, all involved in the negotiation of meaning” (Wenger, 2009, p. 2). Jarvis (2009) similarly insists that learning transforms the individual cognitively and emotively, resulting in a continually changing (or more experienced) person (in Williams, 2012, p. 302) The concept of learning as “active search of identity” is also supported by Packer and Goicoechea (2000), who state that it entails “both personal and social transformation – in short, ontological change” (in Williams, 2012, p. 301). Following the understanding that learning and education is a social process and hence much more than the individual and the processes of the individual mind, we address the theory of critical realism in order to fully understand the very real influence of context on the education process. To do so, argues Case (2013) we need to engage with sociology. As such, using the example that women or people of colour are experiencing higher education in particular ways, Case suggests that we will not go very far if we limit our explorations to a description of individual experience (Case, 2013, p. 30).

University College Nordjylland

17/38

In order to take account more affectively for the social context in which student learning takes place, Case turns to the work of sociologists in which the interactions between parts (society) and the “people”. These distinct aspects of social life are generally termed structure and agency and we will explore this further in the following section.

8.1

Structure and Agency

Another key theorist of critical realism besides Roy Bhaskar (1989) is the British sociologist Margaret Archer who contributed to the critical realism theory by further developing on the concepts of structure and agency. Structure refers to and is understood as the existing social order, as in different roles in society and the institutions that support them, as well as the distribution of material resources in the society. Such “demographic markers” as race, class and gender also constitute element of structure (Case, 2013, p. 31). Structure therefore can be seen as the objective conditions which form and shape individuals. Agency on the other hand defined as “[…]the space where the individual acts with intentionality”; […] agency as such represents the actions of a person (Ibid). If we apply the notions of structure and agency to the subject of our study, international students and their teachers, we can then see them as individuals playing an active part in learning yet being constrained by the existing structural elements. The interplay between agency and structure renders a different understanding of learning than the classical social constructivist approach presupposes. According to the latter, a learner is seen as being actively engaged with, and in control of, the learning process (Pritchard, 2014, p. 35), thus reflecting agency and agency alone. By adding the notion of structure, critical realists, for whom social reality exists independently of the individual (King, 2010), impose objective external boundaries for the individual’s learning process (relations of power, hierarchies, and societal perceptions of race, nationality class, gender etc.). Case (2013) asserts that the social realist approach challenges the widely held assumption that boundaries are always “barriers to be overcome rather than also conditions for innovation and the production and acquisition of new knowledge” (Case, 2013, p. 56). According to her, boundaries should be instead seen as playing an important role in creating

University College Nordjylland

18/38

learner identities and are thus the conditions for acquiring knowledge as well as barriers to learning (Ibid.). In her work Archer also dwells on the concepts of personal and social identity, which are being continuously constructed through social interactions and life experiences (Archer, 2000). As we see learning as a transformative process, the identity of the students is central to our study. The discussion of identity construction or “negotiation” as an ongoing process is also presented in the work of Stella Ting-Toomey who defines personal identities as “our conceptions of a ‘unique self’” (Ting-Toomey, 1999, p. 35). The notion of social identity has been extensively described in the works of H. Tajfel and J.C. Turner, authors of the social identity theory (Tajfel, 2010). They postulate that social identity is what is used by members of a social group to identify themselves by contrast with other social groups. Group memberships and affiliations are a key dimension to our selfconception. We identify ourselves through certain social groups and through juxtaposing “our” groups to other groups. Moreover, members of a social group show in-group favouritism and out-group differentiation, thus creating the proverbial “us and them” divide. Out-group differentiation can result in stereotypes and prejudices, or even discrimination of other groups (e.g. racism or sexism) to rationalise the in-group’s superiority. Both the personal identity and the social identity will be further discussed in the context of UCN and the Study programme.

8.2

Personal and social identity

For Margaret Archer, ‘social identity is necessarily a sub-set of personal identity’ (2003 in King, 2010). Personal identity has a priority over social identity, since personal identity, as the product of an internal reflexive conversation, is independent of social circumstances (Ibid.). According to Archer, “(…) social identity is only assumed in society: personal identity regulates the subject’s relations with reality as a whole” (Archer, 2000, p. 258). Case argues though that personal identity is intertwined with the social identity. She states that “it is not possible to achieve personal identity without social identity and vice versa” (Case, 2013, p. 61).

University College Nordjylland

19/38

If we follow Archer’s construction of individuals as active participants, agents in the boundaries of structure, then the structural conditions for our students need to be investigated in order to understand the prerequisites for their learning. For example the decision to pursue higher education and to go abroad to engage in international education can be made through the interplay of agency and structure. To describe how individuals make decisions, Margaret Archer uses the term “reflexivity”, or “internal conversations” which we go through when we weigh our concerns and decide how to move forward. One of the modes of reflexivity as identified by Archer is communicative reflexivity, which involves making your decisions through discussions with others. The communicative mode relates the individual to the aspirations and life experiences of his or her immediate others, and “thus tends to be associated with staying in the structural circumstances” of the individual’s context of birth and childhood. This argumentation reflects the widely-discussed notion of social conditioning: “If your immediate community does not have wide experience of higher education and you are using a communicative mode of reflexivity, you are unlikely then to choose to study” (Case, 2013, p. 59) and is closely related to the previously mentioned concept of social mobility (see section 5 of this document) . Due to structural constraints, some decisions, like that of pursuing higher education and choosing to go abroad to take a college degree will be more difficult and will require more identity change for some individuals. As Jennifer Case aptly puts it: “[…]We need to recognize that the choice to engage in higher education has a substantially higher cost (not just financial) attached to it, particularly so for some individuals compared to others” (Case, 2013, p. 87). Therefore, in order to investigate the prerequisites for learning for our international students, their structural circumstances need to be researched, and how the decision to enter the Study programme has been formed. This focus on agency also strengthens the notion that international education programmes need to rethink their approach to the students themselves. We share the stance taken by Marginson and Sawir (2011) who believe that international students should be seen as selfdetermining human agents with the full set of human rights (p. 10). As previously stated, recent research within the area of discursive constructions (e.g. Kastberg & Tange, 2014; Tange, 2010; Lillyman & Bennet, 2014; Marginson & Sawir, 2011) illustrates the

University College Nordjylland

20/38

fundamental limitations in much of the academic knowledge about international students, namely a failure to grasp the central fact that international students make their own futures, often under difficult circumstances. This suggests that they are strong human agents, not weak, fragile or dependent agents (Marginson & Sawir, 2011, p. 10). Yet much of the research, many of the teaching strategies and some local students fundamentally treat international students as if they are people in learning and cultural deficit (Ibid.). This is further illustrated by the findings from e.g. Kastberg and Tange (2014) where they describe that the respondents (university lecturers) often end up constructing a perception of nonnative students form a deficit perspective, describing them as more:”[…] dependent, imitative and submissive than the native learners” (Ibid., p.190). It is further proposed that occasionally, one (the researchers) suspects that the lectures are surprised or indeed disappointed that the non-natives do not conform to their idea of “good” learner practice (Ibid.). However, as argued by Marginson and Sawir, this deficit and somewhat ethnocentric approach fails to acknowledge that often many international students are much further advanced in the capacity for intercultural learning than are their teachers and local student fellows (Ibid., p.10). This approach by the lecturers and the institutions thereby creates an environment in which the international students find themselves as “Othered”. This feeling is equally portrayed in UCN context in an annual semester evaluations: “Furthermore I would like to experience the same treatment as Danish students get, because with the approach of some teachers, you can really notice the difference… why do we have to study cultural intelligence if the same does not apply for the teachers?” (Internal UCN documention).

9.

Culture

Archer argues that alongside considerations of structure and agency we need to place the realm of culture. Whereas structure has to do with material goods and further evolves in the domain of social positions and roles, culture is the world of ideas and beliefs (Case, 2013, p. 5). As such, it can be conceptualised as the contents of all the libraries in the world, all possible ways of thinking about ourselves and the world we live, both in the past and in the present (Archer, 1996, xvii in Case, p. 16).

University College Nordjylland

21/38

In continuation of this conceptualisation, Jarvis writes that “[…] learning is inextricably intertwined with culture, and learning is always a cultural and social phenomenon. Indeed, culture is all that is learned by every individual” (Jarvis, 2009 in Williams, 2012, p. 306). Culture remains all the knowledge, skills, attitudes, beliefs, values and emotions that we as human beings have added to our biological base, which we externalize as a result of our learning (Ibid.). The influence on culture on the individual is difficult to underestimate. The notions of personal and social identities which are being affected and transformed through learning and studying at the higher education institution will then have to be supplemented by the notion of cultural identities, as cultural affiliations are equally important in the construction of self and belonging. When a young adult decides to seek higher education in a different cultural environment, his or her cultural identity will become very salient and will also be questioned, or “negotiated”, to use Stella Ting-Toomey’s term, and otherwise affected by the international study experience. How the students are affected by their international study experience depends to a large extent on the institution and the learning environment they come to inhabit. It is apparent that large populations of international students benefit from a diversity of cultural backgrounds, which offer an excellent starting point in evolving intercultural approaches, as outlined in section 1.2. But as we have previously described in this section, often the local education system has been rather slow to act on this opportunity. From the research of e.g. Kastberg and Tange (2014), it would seem that there is an immediate understanding among, in this case, the lecturers and local students, that only the visitors are expecting to gain from adjusting. As suggested by Marginson & Sawir (2011), this could indicate a deep-seated unexamined belief that Western education and Western ways of life are always inherently superior (Ibid., p.21). As the international students are to embark on a journey and adjust to a system or a learning environment that favours one particular cultural standpoint over all others, an increasing pressure which very much reshapes identities is placed on the individual. In applied psychology there is a long standing interest in normalisation i.e. adjusting people to fit a given social system. However, in intercultural relations there is no one “normal” culture and society. Yet, as previously outlined, many teaching strategies used with international students are premised on the idea that the international students are “in deficit”. According to this line of thinking, acculturation means not simply learning to cope University College Nordjylland

22/38

but becoming a part of the new setting: “blending in invisibly with the locals, discarding the old self” (Ibid., p. 22). According to the work of Berry (1997 in Marginson & Sawir, 2014) there are two fundamental dimensions of acculturation: maintenance of the original cultural group and maintenance of relations with other groups (Ibid., p. 24). Using these two dimensions, Berry further identifies four acculturation attitudes or strategies that combine the two dimensions in contrasting ways: 1. Assimilation, 2. Integration, 3. Separation/segregation, and 4. Marginalization. Assimilation hence refers to the agents opts to relinquish the original cultural identity and move into the larger society, whereas Integration means that the cultural identity of the group is maintained while it also becomes an integral part of a larger societal framework. Berry further notes that both assimilation and integration constitute an increased “fit” between acculturating individual and the new context. Separation or segregation occurs when the original identity is maintained and there is no desire to form relations with other groups (Berry, 1989 in Marginson & Sawir, 2014, p. 25). Dominant groups engage in segregation while non-dominant groups, such as international sojourners, engage in separation. In conclusion, marginalization occurs when groups lose cultural and psychological contact with both their traditional culture and the larger society (Ibid.) Marginalization and separation are associated with high levels of acculturative stress, while integration is associated with low levels of stress and assimilation with intermediate levels of stress (Ibid.) The concept of acculturative stress is further addressed in the following section as well as a presentation of the Study programme international students as agents and the multiples contexts in which their learning takes place. In order to summarize this section, the student as learner can be perceived as a primary agent shaped and defined by structural and cultural boundaries. In following this line of thought, a higher education institution will provide a new learning environment, a new University College Nordjylland

23/38

context “the students as primary agents inhabit” (Williams, 2012, p. 309). Williams understands the institution as its faculty and in a broader sense, the management, support staff etc. (Ibid.).

9.1

Personal agency

In the vein of thought developed by Archer, 2000, Case, 2013 and Williams, 2012, in this Pilot study the Study programme will serve as an immediate context and social and learning environment for primarily the international students and the lecturers who are the focus of this study. The UCN context can be elaborated into a set of curricula, from which the students learn (Killick, 2015). Killick distinguishes between the formal, the informal and the hidden curriculum. The formal curriculum encompasses the study programs documentation, and thereby the learning activities and resources which reflect and support the aims, objectives and outcomes of the programme. The informal curriculum covers the various activities and experiences which are available for student participation but are not a requirement of the study programme. Finally, the hidden curriculum communicates messages about values and preferred behaviours of the programme and the educational institution, messages which are usually unconscious, tacit and difficult to read. According to Killick, the hidden curriculum is manifested in the institution’s “practices, discourses, organization of space and time, regulations, charters, choices of logo and motto, and the like” (Killick, 2015, p. 126). The students experience the three curricula holistically, with their learning being shaped by all these dimensions of the life of their educational institution (Ibid.). The formal curriculum will be interpreted and communicated to the students by the lecturers through the teaching they provide. It is crucial to stress that teaching constitutes only one element of the context. We follow the line of thinking articulated by Jean Lave that teaching does not equate learning, and both learners and teachers should be treated as subjects of research (Williams, 2012, p. 301). Yet every lecturer serves as an important contributor to the context as they bear the knowledge and understanding of the formal curricula, as well as the academic knowledge, and they share this knowledge with the students in their respective classrooms. As such they can be characterised as the change

University College Nordjylland

24/38

agents in education (Marginson & Sawir, 2011), which further stresses the fact that their capacities must be continually developed if they are to sustain that role when circumstances change, as they have so rapidly done with the massive inflow of international students. Borden and Evenbeck (2007) refer to Barr and Tagg’s seminal research from 1995 on “shifting from a teaching to a learning paradigm”. Under the new paradigm, the teacher is not just responsible for the delivery of content, but also responsible for “ensuring that students learn and can apply their enhanced knowledge and skills appropriately” (Borden & Evenbeck, 2007, p. 158). Therefore each classroom also constitutes a social learning environment (Urdan & Schoenfelder, 2006), and the lecturer plays a key role in creating a positive classroom climate which is conductive to learning (Danielsen, Wiium, Wilhelmsen, & Wold, 2010; Ghaith, Shaaban, & Harkous, 2007; Wentzel, Battle, Russell, & Looney, 2010). Ghaith and associates for example produce an extensive literature review demonstrating “the importance of classroom climate as a major determinant of learners’ achievement and psychosocial adjustment” (Ghaith, Shaaban, & Harkous, 2007, p. 230). According to the study conducted by (Wentzel, Battle, Russell, & Looney, 2010), students are more likely to display positive aspects of social and academic adjustment when they perceive their teachers and peers as: “providing clear expectations for social and academic outcomes; providing help, advice, and instruction to achieve these outcomes; creating a safe and non-threatening classroom environment; and providing emotional support” (p. 193). Leask (2005 in Marginson & Sawir, 2011) suggests that instructors in higher education need to reflect on their own teaching to see whether or not their own culture and values influences their teaching practices. As such, the international students can be seen as resources (changing the deficit perspective) with which lecturers can deepen their own intercultural competences by engaging with the students and acquiring new cultural perspective (Ibid.). This way of engaging with students, and thereby enhancing the role as change agent or as it is stated in this project, a transformative agent, is supported by Urdan and Schoenfelder (2006), who suggest that students motivation to learn can be affected by contextual influences, and not, as has been traditionally understood, by “weak parenting or stable personality characteristics of the students” (p.331). The authors contend that the learning

University College Nordjylland

25/38

environment, including social interactions in the classroom, whether among students or between lecturers and students, can either undermine or strengthen the students’ motivation to learn. Cruickshank, Chen and Warren (2012) assert that institutions and classrooms are the environments in which practices can either confirm or challenge equal or unequal student treatment and participation. The knowledge and understanding of the informal curriculum will be formed by the students through interaction with the faculty, supportive and administrative staff and the peers. Peer interaction has a great importance for the process of learning, both from the social constructivist and the critical realist perspective. Peer interaction at UCN can be understood in collaboration in the classroom in smaller and larger groups, through socialization between classes and through working on school-related projects after classes. The hidden curriculum will be learnt by the student through formal and informal learning activities, through classroom communication and socialization practices. A literature overview carried out by Cruickshank, Chen and Warren (2012) indicates a common finding as to gaps between international students’ expectations and experiences and “minimal interaction between domestic and international students” (p. 797). It appears from research of causal factors of the lack of interaction between the two student groups that context is of ultimate importance, namely how divisions are constructed in classrooms and other sites in the higher education institutions. Although the cultural backgrounds play a major role in the students’ values, beliefs, behavioural patterns and routines, Cruickshank and associates highlight that cultural factors have been identified in a number of research studies as less important than contextual factors. For example, Barron and Arcodia (2002) found that Confucian Heritage Culture (CHC) students studying in their home cultures showed a preference for a different learning style than Western students in Western universities. However, another research of CHC students studying hospitality and tourism management in Australia showed that through socialization and experience, CHC students adopt a learning style similar to their western peers (Ibid., p. 24). Hill et al. (2010) also acknowledge that socialization is one of the factors affecting learning and cognitive style. An exploration of undergraduate students of Asian background carried out by Wong (2004)

University College Nordjylland

26/38

demonstrates similar results: the students adapted to different learning styles within three months of their studying overseas (in Cruickshank, Chen and Warren 2012, p. 797-798). Limited socialisation with Danish co-students appears to be a widespread issue across the international educations offered in Denmark. DAMVAD’s study (2013) concludes that “only a small proportion of the international students socialise with Danes” (p. 7). Vinther and Slethaug (2015) corroborate this finding by saying that social integration may be the biggest challenge for international students in Denmark. In the particular context of UCN, as indicated earlier, the Study programme undergraduates follow either the Danish or the international stream. Students in both streams are divided into classes according to the chosen specialisation (Hotel and Restaurant management or Tourism management) and language of instruction (Danish or English). The existing practice is that the Danish and international classes receive teaching separately, and there is usually no interaction between the two cohorts of students during classes, students’ group work on assignments and study projects, and preparation for examinations. Occasionally there are guest lectures organized where both streams are brought together, but it is an exception. As mentioned previously, the international classes sometimes have a small percentage of Danish students who choose to study in English, so in classes like that interaction between international and domestic students is possible, but the actual extent of it needs investigation. Therefore, due to the design of the Study programme, our international students have virtually no opportunity to socialize with the students in the Danish stream, and therefore no opportunity to learn through peer interaction with their Danish costudents. There are a number of study skills which are required by the UCN educations which the international students generally seem to lack, such as principles of group work, critical approach to information and data, etc. (Hammershøy, 2014b). Their Danish counterparts are on the other hand much more familiar with these study principles and techniques through their experiences in the previous education in the Danish ground and high school system. We expect that the essentially non-existent socialization between the Danish and the international students during classes would entail barriers to the learning opportunities of the international students.

University College Nordjylland

27/38

Furthermore, the setup of the Study programme and the existence of the two streams create a division between the two cohorts of students. According to Cruickshank and associates (2012), the local practices, the curriculum construction and classroom dynamics often marginalise international students. They also bemoan the usage of such terms as ‘domestic’ and ‘international’ students, as they are too simplistic, lead to stereotyping and contribute to constructing the difference between students (Ibid.). As Killick writes, internationalisation of curriculum presupposes the practice of inclusivity, which can be described as attempts to make the student experience more inclusive, i.e. “more appropriate for and more equitable towards/ among this diverse group of individuals” (Killick, 2015, p. 27). Once again drawing on the findings of Kastberg & Tange (2014), we can establish that international exchange students were perceived as ‘the problematic Other’ by both university lecturers and students. It seems therefore necessary for the purpose of our study to also address the discursive practices of the Study programme curriculum and to analyse whether they promote inclusivity or contribute to marginalization and exclusion of the non-Danish students. Student socialisation can take place both inside and outside the school environment. The social constructivist perspective suggests that any social interaction may result in learning and that most learning does not take place “in school” (Pritchard, 2014, p. 26). This notion is supported by Jarvis (2009) who insists that learning is not limited to formal education, but is ‘life-long’ and ‘life-wide’ (Williams, 2012, p. 301). Jarvis also uses the concept of “incidental learning” which means acquiring information without being aware of it. Incidental learning can happen within the learning environment which the study programme or the academic institution provides, but also outside these environments. Killick (2015) points out that academic institutions exist in wider environments and wider communities. Therefore we also follow the arguments that learning may occur outside the immediate context of UCN and in the broader community where the institution is functioning, that broader context being the town of Aalborg, and even more broadly, the national context of Denmark. The cultural context of Denmark affects and to a large extent shapes the educational culture and practices of UCN. As Vinther and Slethaug (2015) state that in spite of advancing globalization, university culture “is still embedded and adapted to

University College Nordjylland

28/38

national culture, though the national ‘platform’ may be fraught with regional, ethnic and gender differences” (p. 94). It has been mentioned before that learning presupposes transformation and identity change. Already when young adults make the decision to embark on higher education, to participate in a particular course of study, and especially to move to a different country to pursue higher education can be described as a “substantive personal project”, which can be seen as “part of a wider process to establish or re-establish oneself in a specific way of life” (Kahn, 2009 in Case, 2013, p. 87). A number of authors ( (Ramsay, Jones, & Barker, 2007; Vinther & Slethaug, 2015) indicate that students just entering higher education experience have to go through a period of transition which entails profound identity change. Bertram et al. (2014) stress the importance of the first year in higher education, as it is a critical period for the young adults to acculturate to their new roles of university or college students and “the key to many students’ experience of, and success in, higher education” (p. 108). Baxter-Magolda describes the process of entering a higher education as “the crossroads of adulthood” we the students “become the authors of their own lives” (Baxter-Magolda, 1999 in Kolb & Kolb, 2005). Ramsay and associates say that “the period of transition to university represents a separation from the patterns and norms associated with previous experiences, wherein the behavioural patterns of the university context have not been established fully” (Ramsay, Jones, & Barker, 2007, p. 247). Establishing new behavioural, psychological and social patterns requires learning over time in the process of acculturation and psychological adjustment (Lin, 2009). For example, the discourse of UCN as an educational institution indicates the expectations that the students to “take responsibility for own learning” 1. Such academic discourse is representative in the Northern European context, and arises from the Enlightenment views of Germany’s Wilhelm von Humboldt, who believed that “learning should not be rote but rather should focus on independent, autonomous critical thinking for both teacher and student” (Vinther & Slethaug, 1

Curriculum for the Academy Profession Degree Programme in Service, Hospitality & Tourism Management 2014-2016, accessed on 04.07.2015, available at: http://ecampus.ucn.dk/business/enhospitalityandexperience/APinServiceHospitalityandTourismManagement/Documents/Curriculums/20142016/STHM%20institutional%20curriculum%202014%20-%202016%20version%203.pdf

University College Nordjylland

29/38

2015, p. 102). In the same line of thought, the Study programme of this Pilot study distinguishes between “pupils” (high school graduates who enter the Study programme, used to teacher control and little self-autonomy) and “students” (the individuals admitted to and studying in the programme, who are responsible adults actively engaging in “selfauthorship”), which must presuppose that a major psychological and behavioural transition in these young people is expected. Such a transition would require more effort and learning, psychological and behavioural adjustment from students who were brought up in a different academic culture and educational tradition, as is the case with our students from Eastern and Central Europe. Although transition from high school to a higher education institution and from “pupils” to “students” will require acculturation and psychological adjustment from all individuals in order for them to be able to fit in and succeed in the higher education programme, there are indications in research that for the international students to succeed, they have to undergo a “double-layer acculturation” and dual adjustment, since they have to learn the institution’s academic environment, the formal, informal and hidden curriculum, and also to familiarise themselves with the cultural practices and survival strategies in the broader community and the national context (in our case the town of Aalborg and the country of Denmark), and which the students will inhabit outside school hours. Kastberg & Tange (2014) call this double acculturation challenge for the international students “an uphill battle on two fronts” (p. 44). The term “battle” presupposes that there are challenges and difficulties which may arise in the international students’ acculturation process. Bertram et al (2014) write that fighting this battle may result in acculturative stress. Acculturative stress is defined by psychological, physical and social problems experienced by individuals who are adjusting to the new environment (Bertram, Poulakis, Shaw Elsasser, & Kumar, 2014, p. 108). Lin (2009) provides an overview of literature regarding international students’ adjustment allowing the identification of the following problems: language barriers, academic demands, homesickness, loss of social support and status, decreased self-esteem, and a lack of necessary study skills. Moreover, these problems may have “an impact on the academic success, psychological welfare, and the educational institution’s effectiveness in retaining these students” (Lin, 2009, p. 702).

University College Nordjylland

30/38

Ong and Ward (2005) contend that when individuals move to another culture they find themselves “lacking points of reference, social norms, and rules to guide their actions and understand others’ behaviour” (p. 640). It seems logical then, that moving abroad is acknowledged to be a factor of severe stress for individuals (Fontaine, 1986; Black, Mendenhall, & Oddou, 1991; Aycan, 1997). Stress is understood as a “process that occurs whenever an individual’s internal capabilities are not adequate to the demands of the environment” (Kim, 2005, p. 383). Ramsay and associates, based on previous research, state that “as a group, first year students experience higher stress levels than those in later years (Ramsay, Jones, & Barker, 2007, p. 248). It has been widely established that adjustment is a complex and multidimensional concept (Black, Mendenhall, & Oddou, 1991). Although the environment to which the individuals are adjusting is an important factor, people are seen as “active agents who can potentially influence their environments and contribute to their own adjustment” (Ramsay, Jones, & Barker, 2007). That argument is in the same vein as Archer’s interplay between agency and structure. Yeh and Inose (2003) explain the relationship of international students to others in a new cultural environment through the students’ perceived sense of social connectedness (p. 17). Social connectedness is defined as “an aspect of the self that manifests the subjective recognition of being in close relationship with the social world” (Lee and Robbins, 1995, 1998 in Yeh and Inose, 2003, p. 17). If individuals experience a high sense of connectedness i.e integration (to use Berry’s classification) (in Marginson & Sawir, 2014) they can easily form relationships with others and participate in social activities, whereas low connectedness i.e. separation causes low self-esteem, anxiety, and depression. Yeh and Inose (2003) associate high social connectedness in international students with higher propensity to adjust to the new social environment and less propensity to experience psychological stress than in case of students with low social connectedness.

9.2

Socialization and social support

A study of Mainland Chinese college students in Taiwan carried out by Lin (2009) disclosed that in comparison to the Taiwanese students, the former have higher degrees of perceived

University College Nordjylland

31/38

stress and receive less actual social support due to their more limited social networks. Similarly, in a research of international students in US universities, Tompson (1996) discovered that the students perceived the biggest adjustment challenge in developing social networks and in feelings of loneliness and fear of not being able to fit in into the new environment. In the Danish context, perceived social support and availability of networks can affect the propensity of the international students to continue their education in Denmark (for example, to study towards a Bachelor or a Master degree) or their propensity to seek a job in Denmark after graduation (DAMWAD, 2013). The roots of social support research lie in symbolic interactionism (Margaret Mead). According to it, “we form our sense of self or identity in the context of meaningful social ties and roles” (Unchino, 2004). From a communication perspective, social support is defined as “ the verbal and nonverbal communication between recipients and providers that reduces uncertainty about the situation, the self, the other, or the relationship, and functions to enhance a perception of personal control in one’s life experience” (Adelman, 1988, p. 185).

According to House (1981, in Wang, 2001, p. 28), there are four forms of social support: 1. Emotional, e.g., empathy, esteem, trust, concern, affection and listening; 2. Appraisal (or feedback), e.g., affirmation and evaluative feedback; 3. Informational, i.e. “providing a person with information that the person can use when coping with personal and environmental problems” (Ibid.), e.g., advice, suggestions, directives; and 4. Instrumental, e.g., money, help in performing tasks, time, etc. Scholars make a distinction between subjective perception of support versus objective receipt and perceived availability versus perceived receipt (Glazer, 2006). It has been found by a number of researchers that perceived support might better influence one’s cognitive appraisal of stressors than actual receipt of support ( (Glazer, 2006; Unchino, 2004). House (1981) stated that “social support is likely to be effective only to the extent it is perceived” (in Wang, 2001, p.27). The sources of social support can be multiple and include family, friends, the faculty etc., but this study proposes to investigate the social support our international students receive from the Study programme, with a specific focus on the lecturers and peers,

University College Nordjylland

32/38

which follows the arguments of Marginson & Sawir (2011) as they suggest two aspects of cross-cultural relations and social support that involve international students: “relations between teachers and their international students and relations between local and international students” (p.97).

University College Nordjylland

33/38

10.

References

Adelman, M. (1988). Cross-Cultural Adjustment: A Theoretical Perspective on Social Support. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 12, pp. 183-204. Andersen, H. L., & Jacobsen, J. C. (2012). Uddannelseskvalitet i en globaliseret verden: Vidensøkonomiens indtog i de videregående uddannelser. Samfundslitteratur. Archer, M. S. (2000). Being Human: The Problem of Agency. West Nyack, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press. Aycan, Z. (1997). Expatriate Adjustment as a Multifaceted Phenomenon: Individual and Organizational Level Predictors. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 8,4, pp. 434-456. Barron, P. (2002). Providing a More Successful Education Experience for Asian Hospitality Management Students Studying in Australia. Journal of Teaching in Travel and Tourism, 2, 2, pp. 63-88. Barron, P., & Arcodia, C. (2002). Linking learning style preferences and ethnicity: International student studying hospitality and tourism management in Australia. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Education 1(2), pp. 15-27. Benitez, H. (2001). Does it Really Matter How We Teach? The Socializing Effects of a Globalized U.S. History Curriculum. Theory & Research in Social Education, 29,2,, pp. 290-307. Bertram, D., Poulakis, M., Shaw Elsasser, B., & Kumar, A. (2014). Social Support and Acculturation in Chinese International Students. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 42, pp. 107-124. Bhaskar, R. (1975). A Realist theory of science. New York: Routledge. Bhaskar, R. (1989). Reclaiming Reality:A critical Introduction to contemporary philosophy . London: Verso. Black, J., Mendenhall, M., & Oddou, G. (1991). Toward a Comprehensive Model of International Adjustment: An Integration of Multiple Theoretical Perspectives . The Academy of Management Review, 16,2, pp. 291-317. Borden, V., & Evenbeck, S. (2007). Changing the Minds of New College Students. Tertiary Education and Management, 13,2, pp. 153-167. Bryman, A. (2008). Social Research Methods, 3rd ed. Oxford University Press.

University College Nordjylland

34/38

Bryman, A. (2012). Social research methods (4 ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Buch-Hansen, H., & Peter, N. (2005). Kritisk Realisme. Frederiksberg: Roskilde Universitetsforlag. Cambridge, j., & Thompson, J. (2004, 2). Internationalism and globalization as contexts for international education. Compare, 34, pp. 161-75. Case, J. M. (2013). Researching student learning in higher education - a social realist approach. Routledge. Crawford, K., & Wright, J. (2010). From ‘wickedity’ to tameness? Reflections on the application of critical realism to researching higher education. Higher Education Close-up 5, pp.20-22. Crossley, M., & Watson, K. (2003). Comparative and international research in education:Globalization,context and difference. London: Routledge. Cruickshank, K., Honglin, C., & Warren, S. (2012, December). Increasing international and domestic student interaction through group work: a case study from the humanities . Higher Education Research & Development Vol. 31, pp. 797-810. DAMWAD. (2013). Internationale studerendes karriereplaner. Damvad for Styrelsen for Universiteter og Internationalisering, Styrelsen for Fastholdelse og Rekruttering, Aarhus Universitet og VIA University College. Danielsen, A., Wiium, N., Wilhelmsen, B., & Wold, B. (2010). Perceived support provided by teachers and classmates and students' self-reported academic initiative. Journal of School Psychology, 48, pp. 247-267. Fontaine, G. (1986). Roles of Social Support Systems in Overseas Relocation: Implications for Intercultural Training. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 10 , pp. 461478. Ghaith, G. M., Shaaban, K. A., & Harkous, S. A. (2007). An investigation of the relationship between forms of positive interdependence, social support, and selected aspects of classroom climate. System, 35, pp. 229-240. Glazer, S. (2006). Social support across cultures. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30,, pp. 605-622. Hammershøy, A. (2014a). International Hospitality and Tourism Students in Denmark: Are We Doing Enough? Proceedings of CHME conference 2014. Buxton, UK.

University College Nordjylland

35/38

Hammershøy, A. (2014b). The changing student profile at Service, Hospitality and Tourism Management Programme in Denmark. Proceedings of EuroCHRIE conference 2014. Dubai, UAE. Hellstén, M., & Reid, A. (2008). Researching International Pedagogies- Sustainable practice for teaching and learning in higher education. Springer. Hill, J., Puurula, J. S.-L., & Rakowska, A. (2000). Cognitive Style and Socialisation: An exploration of learned sources of style in Finland, Poland and the UK. Educational Psychology: An International Journal of Experimental Educational Psychology, 20,3, pp. 285-305. Kastberg, P., & Hanne, T. (2014). Discoursive Constructions of International Education: How University Lecturers "talk" about International students. Hermes-Journal of Language and Communication i Business(53). Killick, D. (2015). Developing the global student: Higher education in an era of globalization. New York: Routledge. Kim, Y. (2005). Adapting to a new culture: An Integrative Communication Theory. In W. Gudykunst, Theorizing about intercultural communication (pp. 375-400). Sage Publications. King, A. (2010). The odd couple: Margaret Archer, Anthony Giddens and British social theory. The British Journal of Sociology, pp. 253-261. Knight, J. (2003). Updated internationalization definition. Internationalization Higher education, 33, pp. 2-3. Kolb, A., & Kolb, D. (2005). Learning Styles and Learning Spaces: Enhancing Experiential Learning in Higher Education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, vol.4. No.2, pp. 193-212. Lillyman, S., & Bennet, C. (2014). Providing a positive learning experience for international students studying at UK universities:A litterature review. Journal of Research in International Education, 13(1), pp. 63-75. Lin, C. (2009). Exploring Facets of a Social Network to Explicate the Status of Social Support and Its Effects on Stress. Social Behavior And Personality, 37,5, pp. 701-710. Marginson, S., & Sawir, E. (2011). Ideas for intercultural education. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

University College Nordjylland

36/38

Mortensen, J. H., & Fabricius, A. H. (n.d.). Uddannelse on the move-transnational studentermobilitet og uddannelsekvalitet. Samfundslitteratur, pp. 197-2011. Opperman, M. (2000). Triangulation: A Methodological Discussion . International Journal of Tourism Research, 2, pp. 141-146. Pritchard, A. (2014). Ways of Learning. New York: Routledge. Ramsay, S., Jones, E., & Barker, M. (2007). Relationship between adjustment and support types: Young and mature-aged local and international first year university students . Higher Education, 54, pp. 247-265. Sayer, A. (1992). Method in Social Science.A Realist Approach . London: Routledge. Spradley, J. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Tajfel, H. (2010). Social Identity and Intergroup Relations (European Studies in Social Psychology). Cambridge University Press. Tange, H. (2010). Undervisererfaringer med Internationalisering. Århus: Handelshøjskolen Aarhus Universitet. Tange, H., & Jensen, I. (2012). Good Teachers and deviant learners? The meeting of practices in university level international education. 11(2), 181-193. Ting-Toomey, S. (1999). Communicating across cultures. New York: Guilford Press. Tompson, G. H. (1996). International Perspective: Confronting Diversity Issues in the Classroom with Strategies to Improve Satisfaction and Retention of International Students. Journal of Education for Business, 72, 1, pp. 53–57. UCN. (2014). UCN strategi for internationalisering 2014-2016. Aalborg: UCN. Unchino, B. (2004). Social Support and Physical Health: Understanding the Health Consequences of Relationships. New Haven, CT, USA: Yale University Press . Urdan, T., & Schoenfelder, E. (2006). Classroom effects on student motivation: Goal structures, social relationships, and competence beliefs. Journal of School Psychology, 44, pp. 331-349. Vinther, J., & Slethaug, G. (2015). The impact of international students on the university work environment: a comparative study of a Canadian and a Danish university. Language and Intercultural Communication, 15, pp. 92-108, DOI: 10.1080/14708477.2014.985308.

University College Nordjylland

37/38

Volet, S., & Järvelä, S. (. (2007). Motivation in Learning Contexts: Theoretical Advances and Methodological Implications. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Wang, X. (2001). Expatriate Social Support Network, Psychological Well-Being and Performance: A Theoretical Examination and an Empirical Test. . A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research, Faculty of Management, McGill University. Wenger. (2009). Learning capability in social systems. EQUAL. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press. Wentzel, K., Battle, A., Russell, S., & Looney, L. (2010). Social supports from teachers and peers as predictors of academic and social motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology 35, pp. 193-202. Williams, K. (2012). Rethinking ‘Learning’ in Higher Education: Viewing the Student as Social Actor. Journal of critical Realism 11,3 , pp. 296-323. Yeh, C., & Inose, M. (2003). International students’ reported English fluency, social support satisfaction, and social connectedness as predictors of acculturative stress. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 16, 1, pp. 15-28. Yoshida, T., Yoshiro, K., & Suzuki, Y. (2013). Intercultural communication skills: What Japanese businesses today need. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 37, s. 72-85. Aagerup, L. (2015). Pædagogens undersøgelsesmetoder. Hans Reitzels Forlag.

University College Nordjylland

38/38