Teaching in Higher Education Vol. 16, No. 3, June 2011, 305 318
Internationalisation of higher education: integrating international students into Canadian academic environment Shibao Guoa* and Mackie Chaseb a Faculty of Education, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada; bCenter for Intercultural Communication, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
(Received 8 October 2009; final version received 5 October 2010) Fuelled by globalisation, the internationalisation of higher education in Canada is happening at a rapid pace. One manifestation of internationalisation is the increasing enrolment of international graduate students in Canadian institutions. Many of these students face challenges and barriers in integrating into Canadian academic environments including isolation, alienation, marginalisation and low self-esteem. This case study investigates a programme at a large Canadian university intended to help international graduate students with their adaptation to an unfamiliar academic environment. The research shows that the programme was successful in creating a transnational learning space where international students developed a sense of belonging, increased cross-cultural understanding and raised awareness about global issues. More importantly, it helped international students with their integration into a Canadian learning community. The findings have important implications for the development of programmes to provide appropriate levels of support for international students and for building internationally inclusive campuses. Keywords: internationalisation; higher education; international students; adjustment and adaptation; teaching and learning
graduate
Introduction Fuelled by globalisation, the internationalisation of higher education in Canada is happening at a rapid pace. There is a consensus among scholars that internationalisation is not globalisation. They are seen to be related, but at the same time are taken to be very different processes. As Knight (2003) puts it, ‘internationalisation is changing the world of education and globalisation is changing the world of internationalisation’ (3). What’s more, globalisation does not nurture global citizenship. On the contrary, propelled by the relentless pursuit of economic growth, competitiveness and profitability, globalisation works against the higher ideals of global citizenship (Pike 2008). Hence, some scholars are turning to international ´ vila education as a possible alternative in educating for global citizenship (Gacel-A 2005; Mestenhauser 1998). Unlike globalisation, internationalisation represents the positive exchange of ideas and people. It recognises and respects differences and ´ vila 2005). For some it is traditions between nation states (Currie et al. 2003; Gacel-A
*Corresponding author. Email: guos@ucalgary.ca ISSN 1356-2517 print/ISSN 1470-1294 online # 2011 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/13562517.2010.546524 http://www.informaworld.com
306 S. Guo and M. Chase a counter-hegemonic approach that prepares students for work and leadership in a context characterised by global interdependence (Schoorman 2000). One manifestation of the recent development of internationalisation was the increasing enrolment of international students in Canadian institutions of higher education. A study of internationalisation conducted by the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC 2007a) shows that numbers of international students reached 70,000 full-time and 13,000 part-time in Canada in 2006. These numbers further break down thus: 48,000 enrolled in undergraduate programmes and 22,000 in graduate programmes. It is worth noting that international students account for 20% of total graduate level enrolment in Canada. International graduate students play an important role in producing and disseminating knowledge in Canadian universities, not to mention their role as remitters of substantial differential tuition moneys in some institutions. However, we know little about these students’ adjustment to Canadian academic environments. We are still grappling with questions such as: How do they adapt to an academic environment substantially different from their own, with a different language, culture and pedagogical traditions?; Where do they go for assistance?; What kind of institutional support is available?; Regarding a particular category of international student, the international teaching assistant (ITA), how can they best be prepared for their responsibilities? This study aims to fill a gap in scholarship by investigating the ITAs in Canadian academic environments. The discussion is organised into five parts. It starts with a review of pertinent literature related to internationalisation, and follows this up with mapping the landscape of internationalisation in the context of Canadian higher education. The third part reports on data collected in the study. Next, the article explores a case study in a single institution in Vancouver. Finally, it concludes with a discussion of the study’s implications.
Review of literature Defining internationalisation What precisely is meant by ‘internationalisation’ has been the subject of much discourse over the past 20 years (Knight 2003). Despite the increased use of internationalisation in describing the international dimension of higher education over this period, there remains a great deal of confusion about what it means (Bond 2003a; Zha 2003). This confusion makes the discussion of internationalisation difficult. Hence, it is important to define the term before engaging in any applications that place internationalisation front and centre. First of all, internationalisation can mean many different things to different people. For some, it means a series of international activities (e.g. academic mobility of students and faculty), international linkages and partnerships and new international academic programmes and research initiatives (Knight 2004). For others it means the delivery of education to other countries through satellite programmes (Knight 2004). For Knight (2003), internationalisation is ‘the process of integrating an international, intercultural or global dimension into the purpose, functions or delivery of post-secondary education’ (2). As Knight (2004) notes, this definition reflects changes in the rationales, providers, stakeholders and activities of
Teaching in Higher Education
307
internationalisation. It recognises internationalisation at the national, sectoral and institutional levels, and acknowledges the relationship between and among nations, cultures or countries. It conveys that internationalisation is an ongoing and continuing effort. The three concepts purpose, function and delivery are carefully chosen to describe each of the following aspects of internationalisation: the overall role and objectives; teaching, research and scholarly activities and service; and provision of education course and programmes. Knight claims that the term is generic enough to apply to many different contexts and cover all aspects of education. Having thus defined internationalisation, it is also important to understand the rationales and different approaches of internationalisation. Knight (2004) usefully differentiates the rationales driving internationalisation at the national level from those at the institutional level, and it is this latter that provides a focus for this discussion. According to Knight, internationalisation at the institutional level has been promoted as a way to achieve international academic standards for branding purposes, enhance the international and intercultural understanding and skills for students and staff, generate alternative sources of income, develop international strategic alliances, and foster international collaboration in research and knowledge production. Of course an approach to internationalisation is different from a definition and is characterised by ‘the values, priorities, and actions that are exhibited during the work toward implementing internationalisation’ (18). For Zha (2003), there are four primary approaches: the activity approach, the competency approach, the ethos approach and the process approach. The activity approach focuses on higher education activities that promote an intercultural dimension including the presence of international students, curriculum and student/faculty exchange. The competency approach emphasises the development of skills, knowledge, attitudes and values that are important for one to compete in the global marketplace. It focuses on how the generation and transfer of knowledge help to develop competencies and skills in faculty, staff, students and administrative personnel. The ethos approach, on the other hand, emphasises creating a culture or climate that values and supports intercultural/international perspectives and initiatives. With this approach, the institution’s leaders must be committed to building a culture that embraces multicultural perspectives and the internationalisation of practices and classroom pedagogy. Finally, the process approach stresses the integration of an international and intercultural dimension into teaching, research and service through a combination of activities, policies and procedures. As with any organisational change effort, there is concern with long-term sustainability and according to Zha, the process approach recognises such a concern. To that end, this approach places much emphasis on programmatic and research activities as well as organisational policies and practices. Internationalisation of the curriculum It appears there is consensus among scholars that the curriculum holds ‘a special rarefied status’ in the process of internationalisation. Without appropriate curricula, internationalisation cannot be sustained (Bond 2003a, 4). Some go even further to argue that internationalisation of the curriculum is the single most important component among all internationalisation strategies (Freeman 1998).
308 S. Guo and M. Chase Internationalisation of the curriculum can be defined as integrating an international and intercultural dimension into the course content and materials as well as teaching and learning activities (Bond, Qian, and Huang 2003). Three approaches are commonly used by faculty members to internationalise course content; namely, the add-on approach, the curricula infusion approach and the transformation approach (Bond 2003a, 2003b). The add-on approach, as the name implies, involves adding a reading or an assignment to the existing course content, but leaving the main body of the course untouched and unquestioned. Bond contends that this is the easiest approach as it has a narrow focus and limited impact. The second is perhaps the most widely used and involves infusing the curriculum with international content in the selection of course materials and integrating student experiences into learning activities. It requires much more preparation on the part of the faculty member, according to Bond, and often involves the broader participation of faculty and students. The transformation approach is the most difficult and, as the name suggests, has the potential to change people. It enables students to move between two or more worldviews and requires a shift in the way we all understand the world. When transformation is pursued, it yields genuine reform in the curriculum. Content is, of course, but one aspect of any course offering. The second component to be dealt with involves the internationalisation of teaching strategies and the fostering of classroom experiences to best support the learning objectives of an internationalised curriculum. Unfortunately, literature documenting such practices remains nearly nonexistent (Bond 2003a, 2003b). Drawing on related studies, Bond suggests a number of keys to successful internationalisation: a classroom climate of respect and trust, the communication to students of what is important in a course, the expenditure of effort in getting to know students, a respectful attitude towards students’ knowledge and experience and the use of contextualised and cooperative learning strategies to enhance participation. Bond emphasises the importance of collaboration with colleagues and the mobilisation of campus resources to ensure effective practices. She also reminds us that students with international and intercultural experience are untapped resources, only one reason why international students should not be separated out. Finally, Bond argues that there is no predetermined starting point for internationalising the curriculum, nor any single way to internationalise it. Contextual factors must be taken into consideration including class size, subject matter and the international and intercultural experiences of participants. Furthermore, in the process of internationalising the curriculum, faculty members play a significant role in determining its success (Altbach 2002; Bond, Qian, and Huang 2003; Freeman 1998). Contextual information At this stage, it will be helpful to contextualise internationalisation in Canadian higher education. This will be achieved with the aid of a study conducted by the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC) in 2006, which surveyed its member institutions about the nature and scope of internationalisation at Canadian universities. The study focused on four important aspects of internationalisation: student mobility, internationalisation of the curriculum, international development cooperation and knowledge exports.
Teaching in Higher Education
309
Amongst these, international student mobility is often seen as the cornerstone of the growing internationalisation of Canadian universities. As stated earlier, the AUCC study reveals that the enrolment of international students has increased significantly in recent years, reaching 70,000 full-time and 13,000 part-time in 2006 (AUCC 2007a). Compared with a decade ago, the growth is seemingly gratifying, as the number of undergraduate students at least is three times higher and the graduate student population has doubled. However, when situated within the total postsecondary enrolment of 815,000, the percentage of international students remains low. For undergraduates, this study found that it was only 7%; for graduate students, it was relatively higher at 20%. In many other OECD countries, by comparison, international students remain underrepresented in Canadian higher education, particularly at the undergraduate level. But the influx of international students into Canada is only one aspect of student mobility. The AUCC (2007b) study also examined another aspect of student mobility the sending of Canadian students abroad to study. The finding, unfortunately, is even less optimistic than the report on international student ‘imports’ to Canada. In 2006, only 2.2% of Canadian higher education students went abroad to study, up from 1% in 2000. Destinations for Canadians were largely limited to a small handful of OECD countries: the USA, the UK, Australia, France and Germany. Study abroad programmes were primarily viewed by students as an opportunity for enriching personal experience in order to improve their long-term employability. This perpetually low level of participation raises educators’ concerns. It continues to represent what is seen as ‘an inadequate proportion of students’ that places Canada far behind many other comparable OECD countries (AUCC 2007b, 7). The factors that prevent Canadian students from pursuing studies abroad include: lack of financial support, lack of flexibility in the curriculum at home institutions and lack of language skills. The second key internationalisation strategy identified by the AUCC (2007c) is internationalisation of the curriculum. The results show that Canadian universities are committed to the goal of curriculum internationalisation, identifying it either as an overall strategic priority or as part of a strategy under development. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the programmes experiencing the most growth are international business, international affairs and relations, and international development studies. A number of strategies have been used to integrate an international dimension into the curriculum: notably, involving international scholars and visiting experts, encouraging students to have international and intercultural learning experiences with local ethnocultural community groups, using international and intercultural case studies, organising and conducting international field work or study tours and developing joint programmes with international partners in specific disciplines. Not all internationalisation activities address questions of student body composition and teaching. The AUCC (2007d) study also discusses international cooperation involving the development of human resources and institutional capacity in the South. Collaborative projects include not only traditional forms of training of faculty and students and institutional capacity-building but also research collaboration and joint degree programmes. Governance, environment, health and basic education were some of the most important priorities for Canada’s international development assistance (AUCC 2007d). Unfortunately, throughout the 1990s the primary source of
310 S. Guo and M. Chase funding, the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), saw its own funding significantly eroded, thus placing assistance abroad in jeopardy. Despite the claim that international development cooperation remains a priority for Canadian universities, some scholars have already announced the premature demise of international development in the context of globalisation (Albrow 2001; Knight 2004). Knowledge exportation or, alternatively, the provision of educational products and services overseas, rounds out the list of internationalisation strategies developed by Canadian universities (AUCC 2007e). The level of emphasis placed on knowledge exports is generally identified high, and often undergirds three key institutional goals: enhancing the reputation of the institution as ‘international’, increasing opportunities for international student recruitment and developing an alternative source of income generation. Knowledge exports frequently involve a number of delivery modes including distance education, twinning programmes, offshore campuses, joint degrees and franchised courses and programmes (AUCC 2007e). The AUCC survey was instrumental in helping to map the landscape of internationalisation in Canadian higher education. But since the reports primarily present institutional perspectives, some of the claims need to be interrogated and further researched. A closer reading of terms such as ‘exports’, ‘business transactions’ and ‘global market’ reveals underlying assumptions that equate internationalisation with business opportunities and marketing strategies. It is evident that internationalisation and educating for global citizenship are primarily seen as terms of economic participation. As Shultz (2007) explains, this demonstrates clearly how the neoliberal approach aims to increase the transnational mobility of knowledge and skills. Furthermore, the survey exposed important gaps between rhetoric and action that should not be taken lightly. For example, although most universities have included internationalisation in their strategic plans, only 38% of universities have created positions at the level of vice-president international or equivalent and 58% at the level of director of international affairs (AUCC 2007f). As Bond, Qian, and Huang (2003) confirm, there is an obvious gap between stated institutional priorities and their lack of commitment to internationalisation in both leadership and everyday practice. Another important gap exists between rhetoric that emphasises the recruitment of international students as a way to internationalise campuses, and the lack of support at host institutions that might help international students successfully integrate into Canadian academic environments. While most universities offer ongoing counselling and non-academic support services, only 47% provide specific programmes to ensure a successful academic experience for international students (AUCC 2007f). When international students arrive on Canadian campuses, they face a number of challenges including isolation, alienation, marginalisation and low self-esteem, problems also reported in Australia (Ryan and Viete 2009), New Zealand (Campbell and Li 2008), Singapore (McClure 2007), and the United States (Wang 2009). It is hoped that this article fills an important gap in this literature by investigating a programme at the University of British Columbia (UBC), which aims to help international graduate teaching assistants integrate into Canadian academic environment.
Teaching in Higher Education
311
Data collection This investigation adopted a case study approach because it enabled us to focus on particularities and complexities and, thus, to better understand an activity and its significance (Stake 1995). Two primary methods were used in data collection: document analysis and questionnaire. We analysed historical documents about the programme including programme brochures, funding applications, course syllabi and web information. Two questionnaires were administered between 2002 and 2004. The first focused on building a profile of participants including their gender, age, country of origin, language, educational background, previous work and academic experience. They were collected when participants registered for the programme. To protect participants’ privacy, this study excluded two items from the original questionnaire: name of the participant and contact information. This questionnaire informed us who the participants were. A total of 184 completed questionnaires were received. The second questionnaire sought participants’ feedback on the programme and their learning experiences and consisted of a mixture of open- and closed-ended questions. Participants were asked about the effectiveness of the course in terms of preparations for teaching and presentation, cross-cultural communication and understanding Canadian academic environments (with an emphasis on UBC). A total of 152 responses were collected. The results reveal how participants perceived the programme. In selecting the student quotations, we tried to strike a balance among people who represented the profile of our participants in terms of their gender, country of origin, and field of studies. We followed the university ethics guidelines to report anonymously without identifying their name or department to avoid any complication. Participants’ perspectives complemented with the authors’ observation of participants’ classroom experiences as facilitators of the programme. The UBC was chosen as the site of the case study for two reasons: (1) Vancouver is a cosmopolitan city that attracts people from all over the world and is the site of UBC, which has a long tradition of hosting international students; and (2) the Professional Development Program for International Teaching Assistants (PDITA) at UBC is well established, having been initiated in 1988. Over the course of its existence, it has made a significant contribution to the professional learning and cultural adjustment of international students.
Integrating international students: a Vancouver case study Historical genesis of the programme First, here is a brief account of the history and development of the programme gleaned from our thorough document analysis. As discussed above, the PDITA programme was initiated on the UBC campus through the Centre for Intercultural Communication in the winter of 1988. The programme has continued to the present with many adjustments and modifications to its curriculum and despite the annual challenge of securing programme funding. Unlike many programmes for International Teaching Assistants (ITA), the focus of UBC’s PDITA programme is not English language skills because, as Ryan and Viete (2009) note, simple acquisition of language proficiency does not ensure acceptance and belonging in a learning community. Furthermore, focusing merely on language implies the use of a deficit model that blames student difficulties on language deficiencies (Sawir 2005). Instead,
312 S. Guo and M. Chase the programme focuses on student integration, emphasising cross-cultural communication and effective teaching strategies. The initial programme was developed for ITAs from China pursuing graduate studies in the Chemistry Department at UBC. In the late 1980s China’s ‘open door’ policy saw many Chinese students arrive on Canadian campuses, bringing with them rich teaching and research experiences. At UBC, many of them participated actively in research and teaching activities as research and/or teaching assistants. Despite this, some also experienced tremendous challenges integrating into an unfamiliar learning community with a different language and culture, not to mention pedagogical perceptions. In 1987, with funding from the CIDA, the Centre for Intercultural Communication piloted this project with the Department of Chemistry. Its success led to the continuation of the programme up to the present. Since the mid-1990s, UBC has attracted an increasing number of graduate students to its campus. By 2004, 23% of graduate students at UBC were international and these numbers are increasing every year. In light of this, the project has gradually been expanded to the point where it has become a campuswide programme with graduate students from over 50 different departments.
International profile of participants An examination of the profile of participants reveals that this was a hyperinternational group. The participants represented 36 countries in the world, with the majority from Asia (n 149). With respect to country of origin, almost half (49%) were from the People’s Republic of China, followed by Iran, India, Japan, South Korea, Turkey, Mexico, Germany, Peru, Bangladesh and Malaysia. The country distribution reflects Vancouver’s geopolitical location as a gateway to Asia Pacific. The participants spoke 30 different languages with Mandarin Chinese speakers as the largest group. Among them, 53% were male and 47% female, mirroring the gender ratio of graduate students at the national level (AUCC 2007a). In terms of age, the majority (80%) were 25 years or older, with the largest group aged 26 30 (39%). This finding also reflects the age distribution of graduate students at the national level. In terms of educational backgrounds, more than half (60%) held a master’s degree. Prior to moving to UBC, the participants worked as engineers, medical doctors, researchers, school teachers, and university professors in their home countries. However, only less than half (45%) had experience as a teaching assistant before taking this course. As to their English proficiency, almost half had studied English for 6 10 years and one-third for more than 11 years. At UBC, they were studying in 54 departments, primarily in doctoral programmes. It is clear that the PDITA programme attracted participants from culturally diverse backgrounds and heterogeneous disciplines. As research shows, when international students arrive on Canadian campuses, they bring their language, culture and educational backgrounds to our campuses to add to and enrich our educational environments (Guo and Jamal 2007). Furthermore, campus communities that are more racially and culturally diverse tend to create more richly varied educational experiences that better prepare them for participation in a democratic society (Chang et al. 2006). In addition, learning environments that are supportive of diversity can lead to increased openness to diversity, critical thinking skills and greater personal development (Hu and Kuh 2003), all required in successful global
Teaching in Higher Education
313
citizenship educators. Hence, it is important to embrace this diversity and fully integrate it into our academic communities. A cross-cultural focus The PDITA was offered twice a year in regular terms as a non-credit graduate course, running three hours per week for 11 weeks. Upon successful completion of the programme, participants received a UBC Continuing Education certificate and a transcript record of the course. Based on input from participants, the course was organised under a three-pronged focus: understanding the Canadian academic environment, cross-cultural communication and teaching and presentation strategies. Many students indicated that they arrived at UBC with ‘culture shock’ characterised by isolation, frustration, homesickness and depression. Hence, this was a much discussed topic at the beginning of the course. Students explored the stages of culture shock experienced by newly arrived international students (Jandt 2007). We also combined the discussion with orientation to the UBC academic environment. Although many students attended the orientations organised by the international office or their own departments, they left these in need of more in-depth discussion about how the system worked and the expectations of them as graduate students and TAs. In classroom discussions, facilitators frequently drew on students’ experiences since all participants shared a common background as international students. They brought into the classroom new experiences at UBC, common barriers to adjustment, and a common adaptation process. Together they created a supportive learning community, which proved to be effective in helping them adjust to a new academic life at UBC. In the second component related to cross-cultural communication, we critically examined important terms such as race, ethnicity and culture. The facilitators explored dimensions of culture, using the iceberg metaphor to analyse the underlying assumptions, beliefs and values of culture. We also introduced readings and activities to compare cultures and their differences. More importantly, students brought their own cultural experiences into the classroom, a practice that enriched their learning. Participants enjoyed the Barnga game, a popular simulation activity developed by Thiagarajan and Steinwachs (2006) for raising awareness of cultural differences. Since many of them came from cultures with a collectivist orientation, they found the comparison between individualism and collectivism (Hofstede 1986) useful in helping them understand the more individualistic Canadian academic culture and the ways in which it emphasises individual autonomy and independence. Meanwhile, they were engaged in critical dialogues about the complexity of culture, recognising that culture is fundamentally flexible, dynamic, and constantly changing (Signorini, Wiesemes, and Murphy 2009). Students were also engaged in discussions of the implications of cultural flexibility for teaching and learning at UBC. Facilitators also strove to go beyond the stage of mere recognition of cultural difference. Also emphasised was the importance of understanding interactions of and power differences between cultures. A third component focused on teaching effectiveness across cultures. Some of the topics covered included: classroom management, organisation of content, logical presentation, clear main points and support ideas, audio visual aids, involving learners through questions and receiving feedback from students. This was also the
314 S. Guo and M. Chase hands-on part of the course in which participants developed and enhanced their teaching and presentation skills through designing and delivering two short lessons and receiving feedback from peers. Each teaching mini-lesson was video recorded so that it could be watched and reflected upon after the class. Giving and receiving feedback was a vital part of this component. It was learner-centred and highly participatory. Despite the varying foci of the three curricular components, each of the three was constantly integrated with the others. For example, in the third component, we linked effective teaching with the previous discussion of crosscultural communication in the context of a Canadian academic environment. Also, in the first two components, we incorporated cooperative learning activities such as case studies, role play and critical incident into effective teaching and learning strategies. It was hoped that thorough and systematic training would prepare graduate students well for their future careers in academia (see also Kost 2008 for another Canadian case). Transnational learning experience International students report overwhelmingly positive learning experiences. It is worth noting that since the participants represented 36 countries and 54 disciplines, the tremendous knowledge and experience they brought into the classroom through discussion and mini-lessons were truly educational for facilitators and other students alike. Participants learned from each other about the history, geography, culture, education and economic systems of the country they represented, as well as social issues such as war, poverty, illiteracy and HIV/AIDS pandemic. This would tend to confirm Bond’s (2003a) argument regarding students as untapped resources in internationalising course content and classroom experience. More importantly, students educated each other about global issues and global responsibilities in moving towards the goal of global citizenship. In the second questionnaire, many participants commented on their transnational learning experiences with peers from different countries and different cultural backgrounds. Its highly internationalised curriculum with the cross-cultural focus exemplifies the transformation approach identified by Bond (2003a, b), which enabled students to move between two or more worldviews and enacted a shift in the way that students understood the world. One participant commented: ‘I learned a lot about different cultures. Because my colleagues were from different countries, talking to them was very interesting. This is important because, especially in Canada, many students are from other countries, and knowing more about their culture of origin is definitely very helpful for better teaching’. Another participant stated: ‘I found it very good to meet people from out of Canada and Europe and learned a lot about their culture especially helpful in a city like Vancouver, where there are so many Asian people. To me, it’s rather the intercultural communication that’s important’. The learning experience promoted cross-cultural understanding among participants, but also helped them develop respect for cultural diversity and raise their awareness about global issues. A third participant noted: ‘I learn to respect the cultural difference and accept it naturally. Considering the war occurring now in the world really makes me mad’. Furthermore, many participants commented on how the course helped them develop the competence required as ITAs. Many participants indicated that they had never done teaching or presentations before. This course equipped them with
Teaching in Higher Education
315
sufficient presentation and instructional skills. One participant had this to say: ‘I have never done any lecture in my TA course yet, but practicing here is very good for my future lecture. What I learned here regarding presentation was very helpful for my presentation in my own courses’. Another ITA commented on how important the giving and receiving feedback was as a component of the course: ‘I find the presentation skills very useful. I can get feedback here. It’s very important for me. Often people don’t want to say bad things about your performance, so you don’t know your shortcomings and cannot make progress. But here, people evaluate me frankly. They make me know what I should improve’. In addition, the course helped create a safe space and a sense of belonging where participants could share their common experiences as international graduate students. Some participants indicated that they felt too intimidated to speak up in a regular graduate class because of language and other barriers. At the PDITA course, they felt comfortable to share their experiences with peers. In particular, many of them experienced similar challenges after they arrived at UBC. This programme helped them ease their painful transition process. One person commented: ‘This course provided an opportunity for me to practice speaking up in class. I felt intimidated to do so in my department because most students are native English speakers’. As a result of this course, many participants felt more confident. Some indicated that confidence is the most important thing to ensure a successful adjustment and the PDITA helped them gain that confidence. One participant spoke about this: ‘It made me feel confident, taught me the skills of TA, presentation, and communication, and let me know a lot of friends. It is very helpful especially for me just arriving at UBC. Every Wednesday night is the time when I feel most relaxing and happy’. Another participant commented on how this programme helped them ease their transition process and integrate into the UBC learning community: ‘It is a great chance to make people feel integrated in a community, feel part of UBC and also member of a huge international community that shares similar problems and situations’. In fact, the supportive community and networks built by students during the course usually continued after the course through channels of communications such as email, Internet chat groups, and on-campus gatherings. At this point, it is necessary to acknowledge the drawbacks of the research design. Limited space and the non-reactive nature of questionnaires prevented us from further probing some of the responses in the questionnaire. For example, if a student indicated that they had learnt something from the course, it is difficult to assess if this means they had learnt it or if they perceived they had learnt it. We urge readers to exercise their critical awareness in interpreting the quotations. If time and resources had allowed, it would be ideal to follow-up with personal interviews or focus groups. Conclusion Internationalisation has been viewed by many as a positive educational strategy for promoting global citizenship. In its current approach to internationalising Canadian higher education, however, several problems persist. One pertains to the neoliberal approach driven by economic motives that treat internationalisation and global citizenship as business opportunities and marketing strategies. Second, in internationalising the curriculum, the current practice privileges an add-on approach with a focus on the undergraduate curriculum and ignores the needs of graduate
316 S. Guo and M. Chase students, particularly those of international background. Third, despite the claim that internationalisation is now an integral part of institutional strategies at Canadian universities, there has been a gap between the rhetoric and the reality. Although there is an interest in bringing in international students to internationalise Canadian campuses, in reality there has been a lack of support to help international students successfully integrate into Canadian academic environments. This study was conducted in this context to investigate a programme that aimed to assist international graduate students with their adjustment and adaptation into an unfamiliar academic culture. The investigation explored the history and development of the programme, its international and cross-cultural focus, and the impact on students’ learning and integration experiences. The findings show that the programme created a transnational learning space where international students felt a sense of belonging and where they felt safe to share their challenges and experiences. Consequently, mutual support helped students ease the transition process in integrating into a Canadian university learning community. Furthermore, its internationalised curriculum with a crosscultural focus helped participants develop respect for cultural diversity and increased their awareness and capacity to analyse and see the world from different perspectives, which are required by global citizenship education in the twenty-first century (Andreotti 2010). Its move towards the goal of transformational global citizenship enabled students to move between two or more worldviews and enacted a shift in the way that students understood the world. Ryan and Viete (2009) identified several important principles to help ensure successful learning for international students in an English-speaking academy. These include ‘feelings of belonging; being valued as a person with knowledge; and being able to communicate effectively, creatively, and with confidence’ (309). It seems evident that the PDITA programme successfully met each of these principles. The study also confirms the argument that international students’ intercultural adaptation is not a linear and passive process (Gu, Schweisfurth, and Day 2010). In fact, it involves the presence of ‘a complex set of shifting associations between language mastery, social interaction, personal development and academic outcomes’ (20). Furthermore, the extent and nature of successful adaptation can be enabled or restricted by the availability of institutional support. The success of the programme has important implications for host institutions in providing appropriate levels of support to help international students with their transition and adaptation. However, the programmatic responses have to go beyond the usual one-time welcome orientation. It is important to combine students’ academic needs with their social and cultural needs. Furthermore, integrating international students should not only require the participation of international students themselves but involve all faculty members, staff and host university students. ‘Addressing issues of stereotyping and discrimination’ should be the priority of such efforts (Myles and Cheng 2003, 260). As Otten (2003) notes, ‘the opportunities offered by a diverse educational context are not self-evident and self-fulfilling in terms of the expected educational outcome of intercultural competence’ (13). Hence, it requires collective efforts in building an internationally inclusive campus, where crosscultural leaning is encouraged and global citizenship is nurtured. Like Canada, many countries in the world are experiencing increasing enrolment of international graduate students who also encounter numerous challenges in
Teaching in Higher Education
317
adapting to new academic environments. While many universities and colleges are searching for solutions to help international graduate students with their adaptation, it is hoped that this study will make a solid contribution to this ongoing collective effort. If institutions of higher education are serious about internationalising their campuses, it is essential that they provide necessary support to assist international students with their transition and integration. Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank Li Cheng, Pat Marchall, and Jie Xiong for their assistance with the data collection. Comments from two anonymous reviewers are also noted with appreciation.
References Albrow, M. 2001. Globalization after modernization: A new paradigm for development studies. In Globalization and development studies: Challenges for the 21st century, ed. F. Schuurman, 21 30. London: Sage. Altbach, P.G. 2002. Perspectives on international higher education. Change 34, no. 3: 29 31. Andreotti, V. 2010. Global education in the 21st century: Two different perspectives on the ‘post-’ of postmodernism. International Journal of Development Education and Global Learning 2, no. 2: 5 22. AUCC. 2007a. Trends in higher education: Enrollment. Vol. 1. Ottawa, ON: Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada. AUCC. 2007b. Canadian universities and international student mobility. Ottawa, ON: Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada. AUCC. 2007c. Internationalization of the curriculum. Ottawa, ON: Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada. AUCC. 2007d. Canadian university engagement in international development cooperation. Ottawa, ON: Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada. AUCC. 2007e. Knowledge exports by Canadian universities. Ottawa, ON: Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada. AUCC. 2007f. Internationalizing Canadian campuses. Ottawa, ON: Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada. Bond, S. 2003a. Untapped resources, internationalization of the curriculum and classroom experience: A selected literature review. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Bureau for International Education. Bond, S. 2003b. Engaging educators: Bringing the world into the classroom. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Bureau for International Education. Bond, S., J. Qian, and J. Huang. 2003. The role of faculty in internationalizing the undergraduate curriculum and classroom experience. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Bureau for International Education. Campbell, J., and M. Li. 2008. Asian students’ voices: An empirical study of Asian students’ learning experiences at a New Zealand university. Journal of Studies in International Education 12, no. 4: 375 96. Chang, M.J., N. Denson, V. Sa´ enz, and K. Misa. 2006. The educational benefits of sustaining cross-racial interaction among undergraduates. The Journal of Higher Education 77, no. 3: 430 55. Currie, J.M., R. DeAngelis, H. de Boer, J. Huisman, and C. Lacotte. 2003. Globalizing practices and university responses: European and Anglo-American differences. Westport, CT: Praeger. Freeman, K. 1998. Culture in curriculum: Internationalizing learning by design. In Reforming the higher education curriculum, ed. J. Mestenhauster and B. Eiiingboe, 40 52. Phoenix: Oryx Press. ´ vila, J. 2005. The internationalisation of higher education: A paradigm for global Gacel-A citizenry. Journal of Studies in International Education 9, no. 2: 121 36.
318 S. Guo and M. Chase Gu, Q., M. Schweisfurth, and C. Day. 2010. Learning and growing in a ‘foreign’ context: Intercultural experiences of international students. Compare 40, no. 1: 7 23. Guo, S., and Z. Jamal. 2007. Nurturing cultural diversity in higher education: A critical review of selected models. Canadian Journal of Higher Education 37, no. 3: 27 49. Hofstede, G. 1986. Cultural differences in teaching and learning. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 10, no. 3: 301 20. Hu, S., and G. Kuh. 2003. Diversity experiences and college student learning and personal development. Journal of College Student Development 44, no. 3: 320 34. Jandt, F.E. 2007. An introduction to intercultural communication: Identities in a global community. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Knight, J. 2003. Updating the definition of internationalization. International Higher Education 33: 2 3. Knight, J. 2004. Internationalization remodeled: Definition, approaches, and rationales. Journal of Studies in International Education 8, no. 1: 5 31. Kost, C.R. 2008. Innovations in teaching assistant development: An apprenticeship model. Foreign Language Annals 41, no. 1: 29 60. McClure, J.W. 2007. International graduates’ cross-cultural adjustment: Experiences, coping strategies, and suggested programmatic responses. Teaching in Higher Education 12, no. 2: 199 217. Mestenhauser, J. 1998. Internationalisation of higher education: A cognitive response to the challenges of the twenty-first century. International Education Reform 18, no. 1/2: 3 7. Myles, J., and L. Cheng.. 2003. The social and cultural life of non-native English speaking international graduate students at a Canadian university. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 2, no. 3: 247 63. Otten, M. 2003. Intercultural learning and diversity in higher education. Journal of Studies in International Education 7, no. 1: 12 26. Pike, G. 2008. Citizenship education in global context. Brock Education 17, no. 1: 38 49. Ryan, J., and R. Viete.. 2009. Respectful interactions: Learning with international students in English-speaking academy. Teaching in Higher Education 14, no. 3: 303 14. Sawir, E. 2005. Language difficulties of international students in Australia: The effects of prior learning experience. International Education Journal 6, no. 5: 567 80. Schoorman, D. 2000. What really do we mean by ‘internationalization? Contemporary Education 71, no. 4: 5 11. Shultz, L. 2007. Educating for global citizenship: Conflicting agendas and understandings. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research 53, no. 3: 248 58. Signorini, P., R. Wiesemes, and R. Murphy. 2009. Developing alternative frameworks for exploring intercultural learning: A critique of Hofstede’s cultural difference model. Teaching in Higher Education 14, no. 3: 253 64. Stake, R.E. 1995. The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Thiagarajan, S., and B. Steinwachs. 2006. Barnga: A simulation game on cultural clashes. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press. Wang, J. 2009. A study of resiliency characteristics in the adjustment of international graduate students at American universities. Journal of Studies in International Education 13, no. 1: 22 45. Zha, Q. 2003. Internationalization of higher education: Towards a conceptual framework. Policy Futures in America 1, no. 2: 248 70.
Copyright of Teaching in Higher Education is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.