ECER Conference – University of Crete 2004
Bridging the Gap in Expectations between International Students and Academic Staff - “At home the
teachers feed me with knowledge, but in the UK they help me pick up the spoon and learn to feed
myself!”
Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research Post Graduate and New Researcher
Pre-Conference, University of Crete, 20-21 September 2004.
Emma Kingston and Dr. Heather Forland, International Centre, Roehampton University, London,
United Kingdom.
Email: E.Kingston@roehampton.ac.uk
Abstract
This paper is concerned with the transition into higher education in the United Kingdom of students with an East
Asian background. It is concerned with the possibility of a synergy between East Asia’s collectivist culture and
the Western individualistic culture within the higher education system. Such a fusion often creates a clash of
traditions and simply assuming that the native countries implicit social and academic rules should be adhered to
create tensions that, when considering that students from East Asia are one of the most rapidly expanding groups
within the United Kingdom’s higher education system, can no longer be overlooked.
A primary objective of the research is to provide both a good practice guide with which to understand the
business of internationalisation at this level, and to draw comparisons between the often implicit expectations
that overseas students bring with them, to those of the university they are attending, conveyed through its
academic staff. In order to attempt this, the Confucian heritage of East Asia and Socratic philosophies upon
which Western education is based, must first be teased out so that they can be dealt with explicitly. This will
necessarily involve investigating the different principles that students have for teaching and/or learning, their
general ideas about method, style and approach to teaching/learning, as well as dealing with the presuppositions
and assumptions that both overseas students and academic staff bring with them.
This research opens the possibility of resolving some of the contradictions and problems that arise when cultures
based on differing philosophies meet within a higher education environment. The intention is to provide an
opportunity for both academic staff and overseas students to discuss the issues they face in their daily
experiences of learning and teaching, for students to voice their praises and concerns of the current practices in
place and for staff to become aware, to a greater degree, of such comments in order to make the experience of
studying in the United Kingdom as productive and fulfilling as possible. Our aim in embarking on this research
project is therefore to help learner’s adapt to new learning styles and for the institution to adjust, through the
composition of a good practice guide for Roehampton staff and students. The ultimate goal is therefore to
narrow the gap between the expectations of students and academic staff by working towards a synergy of
educational cultures.
Keywords
International students / Internationalisation
Higher Education
Individualistic (Socratic) / Collectivist (Confucian) Cultures
Synergy
Emma Kingston and Dr. Heather Forland, International Centre, Roehampton University, London, UK.
1
ECER Conference – University of Crete 2004
Introduction
Two key traditions are explored in this study. First is the collectivist educational tradition found in East Asia
(Confucian philosophy) that emphasises learning as a one-time process for the young as a collective group and,
second, the individualist educational tradition found within Western societies (Socratic philosophy), such as the
United Kingdom (UK), which emphasises learning as a life-long process for individuals (Barker, 1997). Through
investigating these differences, it has been suggested that there is a common misconception among academic
staff (and native students) that students from Confucian traditions under-perform in comparison with their
western peers (Watkins et al., 1991). However, researchers such as Biggs (1999) point out that, on inspection of
grades, this misconception is often unfounded.
By translating previous research conducted within the Western educational domain, to East Asian educational
traditions, such misunderstandings may well have an impact on international students studying in the UK.
Therefore, it is essential that higher education institutions (HEIs) functioning within Western traditions and
welcoming international students, must become increasingly aware of these educational differences, so that their
international students are not left culturally adrift, and may be allowed to gain the maximum benefits from
studying abroad.
This paper is therefore set within the context of changes taking place within the higher education (HE) system in
the UK. The main motivator behind this research project emerged as a result of the explosion in international
students attendance at HEIs in the UK (Wisker, G, 2004), but particularly with one of the most rapidly
expanding groups, those students from East Asia. For instance, between 1994/5 and 2001/2, the number of
Chinese students enrolled as undergraduates in UK higher education rose from 2950 to 4935, a 60% increase
(HESA, 2003).
Confucian versus Socratic Traditions
As stated above, the two key traditions explored in this study are those of East Asia’s collectivist educational
tradition (emanating from the Confucian philosophy) that emphasises learning as a one-time process for the
young as a collective group, thus echoing the educational backgrounds of the most rapidly expanding group of
students at Roehampton, and indeed in the UK. The second tradition being the Western world’s individualist
educational tradition (emanating from the Socratic philosophy), such as the United Kingdom (UK), which
emphasises learning as a life-long process for individuals (Barker, 1997) and the educational culture from which
the authors originate. The philosophies behind the origins of these traditions may easily, but not necessarily
correctly, be placed at opposite ends of the educational spectrum.
The historical impact of education in East Asian culture is derived from the teachings of Confucius (551 – 478
BC) and philosophers of the middle – late Chou eras. Confucius’ teachings appealed to the human ability to
utilise reason and taught superiority to ambition, respect of others and the ability to forgive. Whilst the historical
impact of Western education is derived from the teachings of Socrates (470 – 399 BC), a Greek philosopher and
intellectual leader who devoted himself to study and intellectual enquiry, attracting many followers, such as
Plato and Aristotle (Cook, 1979).
Confucius believed that education possessed the power to equalise all people, offering both a means of upward
mobility (as opposed to inherited privilege in the Western world) from the poverty rife in China, and also the
corrective means to curb any propensity to act unethically or antisocially. In contrast to Western education,
particularly in the case of the model of higher education in Medieval and Renaissance universities, which
encouraged dispute among its scholars, traditional Chinese education principally entailed rote learning and
memorisation of the Classics, which was a precursor to understanding. However, with this in mind, a current
area of misunderstanding amongst native academic staff, students and often researchers, stems from the belief
that students with Confucian philosophies use rote learning methods, which can lead to what western education
refers to as Plagiarism and only taps into surface learning, seen, from a western perspective, as a far less
Emma Kingston and Dr. Heather Forland, International Centre, Roehampton University, London, UK.
2
ECER Conference – University of Crete 2004
effective form of learning (Chan & Drover, 1997). However, numerous researchers have argued that, what
Western researchers mistake for rote learning, is in fact learning through memorization that often involves deep
learning strategies (Wing On, 1996; Chan & Drover, 1997).
1
A key element of traditional Confucianism was therefore that the purpose of the scholar class was, “The creation
of bureaucratic generalists familiar with an accepted ethical outlook and body of knowledge”, as opposed to the
Socratic traditions that emphasised “the growth of knowledge or with academic specialisation.” (Morson, 1990,
p.86). As such it is quite common for contemporary research looking into international students study
behaviours, to set these students apart from their western peers and attribute all such differences to the
educational philosophies of their backgrounds. Indeed, the Western presuppositions concerning the impact of
Confucianism, even on today’s students, are a common feature of research conducted in this area during the
1980’s and 1990’s (Hofstede, 1980; Ballard & Clanchy, 1984; Watkins et al., 1991; Cosh, 2000). Such
researchers seem to have allowed their sweeping assumptions of an entire culture to lead and often overshadow
their conclusions.
Although these presuppositions still colour the most up-to-date studies in the UK, current research is beginning
to become self-evident. For instance, Shi (2004) highlighted that there are contradictory perspectives regarding
the East Asian learning culture. The first adheres to the popular view that current East Asian students are heavily
influenced by their Confucian heritage (i.e. they are passive, obedient and lacking in autonomy); although Shi
points out that Westerner’s may not fully understand the intricacies of this tradition. The second perspective
argues that the differences between East Asian learners and Western learners are subtler. However, regardless of
perspective, Shi’s work does point to an over-dependency of western research in attributing outcome to the
traditions of the East Asian learning culture. Of greatest interest however, is Shi’s assertion that the traditional
Confucian culture of learning is in a state of transition, and the current generation of East Asian learners are
becoming increasingly similar to their Western peers. Shi’s research challenged traditional western stereotypes,
suggesting that the Confucian learning culture is evolving into modern individualism.
The Business of Internationalisation
Professor Michael Gibbons (1998) outlined the following working definition of concepts involved in
internationalisation at a symposium concerning HE; “…Internationalisation defines a process in which
resources are drawn from the global environment and combined with local talent to produce innovations which
help fulfil institutional objectives” (Brown, 2000, p11). The internationalisation of HE is a developing field of
study and since the late 1980’s/1990’s, the university’s function in this has invited mounting interest, especially
with regard to HE’s resistance in allowing it to become a mainstream agenda, evidenced by the lack of clearly
expressed standards and principles to direct the progression of HEIs international activities. Nevertheless, whilst
internationalisation is recognised as a crucial reaction to the wider economic trend of globalisation (Middlehurst,
2002), surveys conducted by the Committee of Vice Chancellors and Principals (CVCP) in 1996 and again in
2000 to determine the degree and scope of international activities undertaken by HEIs, is a sure indication that
this area was, and continues to be perceived as problematic (Brown, 2000). However, since these surveys, UK
HEIs have enjoyed a marked increase of transnational provision (e.g. first year of degrees being delivered in
China, branch campuses of Nottingham etc.).
Nevertheless, it must be noted that involvement of HEIs in international activities is in danger of being disjointed
and isolated to innovative individuals and international centres for as long as these activities are misconstrued as
being outside the scope of strategy development at the corporate level and as a result, making a minimal
contribution to the progression of HE. Therefore, although fundamentally national institutions, UK universities
need to recognise and tackle the role that internationalisation has to play in their central functions, in research &
development and equally significantly in learning and teaching, all of which are essential elements in the
experiences of international students.
Surface Learning relies on the use of rote memorisation and routine procedures, which require repetition of information until it
is memorised, while deep learning involves trying to extract meaning, so as to reach a thorough understanding.
1
Emma Kingston and Dr. Heather Forland, International Centre, Roehampton University, London, UK.
3
ECER Conference – University of Crete 2004
Some 225,000 overseas students are currently enrolled in HE in the UK, amounting to 10% of UK universities
income, with students from East Asia being one of the most rapidly expanding groups of students entering the
UK’s HE system - Roehampton University being of no exception to this trend (For instance, between 2000-1 and
2003-4 the number of Chinese students at Roehampton has increased from 55 to 163). This trend seems set to
continue both in light of the Prime Minister’s Initiative to increase numbers of international students by a further
75,000 by 2005 (Parsons et al., 2004), and by the rapid economic development in Asia. However, there are
increasing concerns that the explosion in numbers of students from East Asia enrolling at UK universities has not
been accompanied by an increase in awareness of problematic issues faced by these students and as such, these
students may not be receiving the high quality of tuition that this expensive educational experience necessitates
(Rastall, 2004). Such views have emerged as a result of the UK’s deficit model of HE, in which the ‘cultural
providers’ (i.e. universities) allow those alien to the culture to visit, learn from, and ultimately return home
invigorated from this new cultural experience, or as Wisker (2000) describes it, the ‘colonial hangover’ model of
HE (p.5). Nevertheless, the internationalisation of HE seems to be gradually evolving, as international activity
becomes an increasingly valuable asset to universities and the push for non-regulated fee income (unrelated to
the Government) increases.
As the internationalisation of HE evolves in the UK, it is important to bear in mind both positive and negative
affects. Whilst the positive affects have been relatively well documented in the early evolution of research into
this area, the negative impacts, at least with respect to western research, have been overlooked. Such negative
affects include ‘brain-drain’ from developing countries, a decrease in demand for minority languages, and loss of
national identity (Parsons & Fidler, 2004). However, the negative affects of the individual international student
studying in western education is better documented and if unresolved will have an impact on the evolution of
internationalisation and is therefore fundamental to research in this area. For instance, a survey conducted by the
University of Portsmouth highlighted that East Asian students’ transition into the UK’s HE system involved
serious difficulties with regard to under-developed skills for autonomous study, research skills (particularly with
regard to utilising the library facilities available), language competence and Western lifestyles. However, on the
other hand, Rastall (2004) suggests that ‘…we may be overestimating the factor of cultural background.
Students are generally quick to adapt. Other results show a lack of confidence (relating to uncertainty of how to
study outside class, and requesting more information/support etc.)…’ (p.16). As such it is clear that there is a
real need for more research into the internationalisation of HE through investigating overseas students
experiences of studying in a western learning culture so that such contradictory evidence can be investigated.
One of the key contributors to the increasing numbers of international students into UK HE is the perception that
British education is of an excellent standard. However, recent research by MORI (a market research
organisation commissioned to collect data relating to Government initiatives) indicated that these high
expectations are not borne out when students arrive in the UK and in order to continue attracting international
students, the UK’s HEIs must resolve this discrepancy (British Council, 2004). It is therefore hoped that this
study is the first step in resolving this issue at Roehampton University. Thus the need for rapid empirical
development that informs practice is becoming ever more pressing, highlighted further by recently publicised
concerns by the Chinese press over the “perceived devaluation of overseas awards” due to the rising
unemployment rates of students holding them, despite the high demand for their expertise (Rastall, 2004, p.6). A
further warning regarding the process of internationalisation of HE, is provided by Parsons and Fidler (2004),
who suggest there may be a reverse process of internationalisation emerging, which they have termed ‘Deinternationalisation’. This term is used to propose that there is evidence of a reduction in overall international
activity in UK universities; particularly with regard to the number of UK students studying abroad, levels of
language learning and competition for jobs across international borders. However, despite the fact that this is a
view held only by individual researchers, it does stress the need for both theoretical and conceptual development
of internationalisation in HE, so that HEIs can move towards a synergy of cultures and away from less
productive trends such as ‘academic tourism’ (satisfying academic staff’s urge to travel abroad (McNay, 1995)).
But, as Parsons and Fidler point out, ‘…whilst there’s little evidence of de-internationalisation as concerns
recruitment of international students, global competition is increasing and forward momentum is not inevitable’
(p.27).
Emma Kingston and Dr. Heather Forland, International Centre, Roehampton University, London, UK.
4
ECER Conference – University of Crete 2004
A Case for Cultural Synergy?
Cultural differences may be considered problematic if evaluated from the perspective of another cultural
background, but in the current climate of internationalisation the emphasis for change should not be restricted to
one of the cultures involved, as to do so would imply that this culture is the lesser of the two. As such it is
essential that this transition necessarily involves give and take by both parties – a view which has led to the idea
of cultural synergy, in which both cultures are equally valued and grow and adjust together in order to
successfully integrate and gain reciprocal benefits. As such, cultural synergy ‘…implies mutual effort from all
participants to learn about, understand and appreciate others’ cultures and their interpretations of learning and
reciprocally to learn with and from others.’ (Jin & Cortazzi, 2001, p.1). Therefore, the aim of future research
should focus upon bringing cultural influences into the conscious awareness of all involved in the HE system, so
that differing educational learning cultures can become integrated and the possibility of students feeling
culturally adrift be addressed.
Current research highlights that there is a general awareness amongst UK universities of the issues affecting
international students and that individual HEIs are starting to make an effort to understand and try to address
such issues. The issue of the ‘cultural shock’ that international students experience when first entering a UK
HEI is particularly marked for students from East Asia (Rastall, 2004) and a primary issue affecting student
success. Some recent research conducted at a UK, London University, found that all East Asian students found
it difficult to converse with their English speaking peers, to the point where‘…hypotheses and stereotypes about
speakers of English which could impact negatively on motivation and self-image, thereby providing real
obstacles to academic success.’ (Salter-Dvorak, 2004, p.32). This can lead to what Thomas (1983) refers to as
‘Pragmatic failure’, in which people fail to communicate with their peers, as they do not hold a common
linguistic of cultural background, which can result in students feeling culturally adrift. This isolation from native
students has also, most worryingly, led to international students having feelings of depression and can lead to
students failing or dropping out of their course. Such information has the potential to fuel incidences of negative
press, as seen above, which may subsequently inhibit internationalisation and add impetus to deinternationalisation.
Without cultural synergy the dominant cultural literacy will hinder the internationalisation of the HE curricula
unless it is acknowledged, altered and broadened to become interculturally receptive (Mackinnon &
Manathunga, 2003). Salter-Dvorak aptly and concisely outlines this need for synergy as opposed to a one-way
adjustment in which all the work is done by non-native students, and whilst Salter-Dvorak is commenting upon
Chinese learners in particular, the following comment can, nonetheless, be applicable to all international students
studying in the UK; ‘We have as much to learn from our Chinese learners as they have to learn from us.’ (2004,
p.38), and it is through an open-minded regime of research that HE can learn and benefit from its international
students.
The Research
The research itself will involve a range of participants with East Asian backgrounds, both undergraduate and
postgraduate students, being invited to discuss their own experiences and understanding of the various
educational systems in which they have been involved. Academic staff at Roehampton will also be invited to
discuss their experiences of teaching students from East Asia.
Research Questions
The research questions are designed to address the different principals that a person has for teaching and/or
learning, his/her general ideas about method, style and approach to teaching/learning, as well as dealing with the
presuppositions and assumptions that both overseas students and academic staff bring with them. Therefore the
research questions will address several aspects of learning cultures, including staff and students’ perceptions and
expectations of each other, of assessment, plagiarism, support and comparisons between cultures to try to tease
out any mismatches in expectation between the two.
Emma Kingston and Dr. Heather Forland, International Centre, Roehampton University, London, UK.
5
ECER Conference – University of Crete 2004
Description of the Research
In March 2004, two semi-structured focus groups (see appendix 2 for schedule) were facilitated in the
Roehampton Educational Development (RED) Centre. Access to the participants was obtained through directly
contacting students enrolled in courses at Roehampton University. Volunteers for the focus groups included a
mixture of undergraduate and postgraduate students from a variety of courses. Of these students, 25% were male
and 75% were female, their ages ranging from 22 – 39.
Students were also asked to complete a short biographical questionnaire including details of their cultural and
personal backgrounds before attending the focus groups (see appendix 1). The focus group discussions were
facilitated by both authors and were guided by 20 open questions designed to stimulate discussion, split into 5
sections: General views of learning and HE, expectations regarding lecturers and assessment methods,
understanding of plagiarism, knowledge of available support and comparison of previous experiences of
education with experiences at Roehampton. The facilitators probed points, relevant to the study to clarify
meaning and follow up on interesting points of discussion not covered by the questions. Each focus group took
approximately one hour.
After the points of interest from each focus group had been compiled and corroborated by both authors, the
academic staff questionnaire was drawn up and a short questionnaire regarding staff and students views of the
characteristics of effective teaching. The short questionnaire consists of Ramsden’s (Ramsden, 1992) 13
characteristics of effective teaching for which the students will be asked to rank them in order of preference (1 =
extremely important – 13 = not important at all) (see appendix 3). A random selection of both international
students and academic staff will be asked to complete this for later comparison, in order to identify whether any
mismatches of expectation appear. The academic staff questionnaire will be emailed to staff known to teach
international students, to complete at their leisure. This questionnaire reflects the issues brought up in the
student focus groups, containing a mixture of open-ended questions, 5-point likert scales and sentences to
complete (see appendix 4). The questions focus upon a comparison of international students to their native peers
and will be emailed to staff at the start of the new academic year. The short questionnaire regarding the
characteristics of effective teaching will also be administered to staff and students upon the start of the new
academic year.
Findings and Conclusions to Date
In general the data from the two focus groups showed that although the majority of participants utilised rotelearning methods that in order for this to be successful it must be based in understanding, indicating deep
learning. This supports Shi’s (2004) point that Western researchers may not fully understand the intricacies of
this tradition and the suggestion that the current generation of East Asian learners is becoming increasingly
similar to their Western peers. Participants also pointed out the importance of valuing their own opinions,
suggesting that these participants were autonomous, reflective learners, again opposing the western stereotype
that students from Confucian traditions are passive, obedient and lacking in autonomy.
With regard to lecturers, support was cited as “very important” in aiding and clarifying learning, although one
participant argued that some lecturers just “don’t care about us [overseas students]”. However another
participant argued that “I love all our tutors…and really enjoy my tutorials!!”, thus highlighting inconsistencies
between academic staff teaching styles, and the need for a support system for staff teaching international
students. All participants agreed that they felt uncomfortable asking their tutors questions during a
lecture/seminar, which may have led to some breakdown in communication. Participants also pointed out that
they found note-taking particularly difficult because they were working in their second or third language.
Participants agreed they would like more pre-prepared notes to assist their learning. Such difficulties might also
be alleviated via mentoring facilities, where native students act as a further support system (e.g. systems that
Oxford Brooks and some London based Universities have successfully piloted).
Emma Kingston and Dr. Heather Forland, International Centre, Roehampton University, London, UK.
6
ECER Conference – University of Crete 2004
In respect to assessment methods, the vast majority of participants preferred essays, “partly due to language
problems and partly to do with personality type”, but also as essays have a larger scope for allowing students “to
have time to put thought into it”. The majority of participants preferred educational contexts in which they did
not have to speak, citing language difficulties as the main inhibitor, although nearly all participants enjoyed and
felt comfortable with group work, as it allowed the chance to share ideas and develop personal ideas in a
supportive environment, it allowed the opportunity to practice speaking English with native students. However,
without exception, participants thought timed examinations were the most challenging and stressful form of
assessment, indicating the impact of language difficulties. All participants preferred receiving written feedback
from their tutors as it was perceived that academic staff would put more time into this form of feedback as
opposed to verbal feedback, perhaps giving a further reason behind their dislike of summative examinations in
which feedback is often only numerical.
Although there was slight confusion over some aspects of plagiarism (i.e. whether to reference ‘general
knowledge’ and personal thoughts that unknowingly replicated another person’s ideas) it is more than likely that
native students would experience similar problems. Also in opposition to western stereotypes was that students
from Confucian traditions see plagiarism as a mark of respect, however, whilst the majority of participants
agreed that plagiarism was frowned upon in their home countries, it was also pointed out that nothing was really
done to stop it unless an attempt to plagiarise was extremely obvious. As such the UK’s views and punishments
were seen as stricter than the majority of participants’ home countries i.e. the difference is not in the issue but the
extent to which it is punished.
Participants cited the RED (Roehampton Educational Development) Centre as the main source of support.
However, interestingly, not one of the participants was currently utilising this or the language centre support
facilities, the main reason being a lack of time and being too busy with studying. Rather ironically some of the
courses available in the RED and language Centres may well have helped students structure their time more
effectively whilst improving their standard of English, attested to by other students, not present in either focus
group, who had told some of the participants of the usefulness of these courses. Regardless of this, one
participant pointed out that support was integral to becoming an independent learner and that, “we are
independent learners but within a supportive environment”, thus highlighting a problem in which those students
who feel most overwhelmed spend all of their spare time studying and as a result do not feel that they have the
time to utilise the support facilities that are in place to support such difficulties.
With regard to comparing the UK’s HE system to their home countries, all participants expressed their
preference for the greater freedom students are allowed in the UK, one participant noting that, “At home the
teachers feed me with knowledge, but in the UK they help me pick up the spoon and learn to feed myself!”. The
majority of participants pointed out that in the UK the teaching and learning styles are more active and open and
therefore more attractive than in their home countries, in which the majority of participants agreed that to their
frustration they were not encouraged to express their opinions so freely and where independent thought is not
expected. One participant noted that “at home there is no confrontation as we just keep quiet and are taught”,
indicating the passive nature of this educational system. Participants agreed that at first, it was a riskier and
more nerve-wracking option to study abroad, but argued that rather than hindering them, this risk actually
motivated them to work harder.
Finally with respect to how Roehampton could improve it’s international students experience of HE, all
participants agreed it would be useful to gain insight into the expectations of the UK’s education system and
university’s policies of learning and teaching before starting their courses, or very early on in their courses. It
was suggested that this could be remedied by sending information to students before they come to the UK,
and/or by developing an induction week, or set of workshops early in the first term. Other suggestions involved
a proofreading service and better publication of support services available, which one participant argued was
currently possibly too advanced for some students with poor English language skills.
Therefore, in view of our initial findings, it seems that the typical western stereotypes of students with Confucian
backgrounds did not reflect the participants in our focus groups. Instead it would appear that these students very
much conform to Shi’s (2004) recent suggestion that the current generation of East Asian learners are becoming
Emma Kingston and Dr. Heather Forland, International Centre, Roehampton University, London, UK.
7
ECER Conference – University of Crete 2004
increasingly similar to their Western peers. Nevertheless, there does appear to be a marked difficulty with
pragmatic English, which can lead to students feeling culturally adrift and isolated (Thomas, 1983). However,
none of our participants were currently enrolled in any of the support facilities available through either the RED
or language support centres, so there appears to be some sort of failure on Roehampton University’s part –
perhaps attending support sessions should be made a compulsory part of international students induction week,
so as to promote their usefulness.
The Future
As we are currently in the initial stages of this research project, investigating the gaps in expectation between
academic staff and East Asian students’, the future primarily revolves around taking our research a stage further.
By 2005 we hope to have administered and analysed data from the academic staff questionnaire and short
questionnaire regarding the characteristics of effective teaching, in order to compare the perspectives of
academic staff and their international students. As a result of these findings it is fully expected that further focus
groups or individual interviews of both staff and students will be necessary, the topics of which will be
determined by the previous research.
As a result of this research we hope to compose a good practice guide for Roehampton staff which will act as a
support mechanism for both new and existing staff involved in teaching international students. The research
completed to date has highlighted that although there is a general awareness of the support facilities in place for
international students, attendance rates of the participants in our focus groups were worryingly low as a result of
student’s perceived lack of time, and the support on offer being possibly too advanced. Therefore it will be
necessary to find a method for requiring students to attend at least one support session, perhaps during an
induction week before academic work begins, so that they can experience what a typical session involves and
also, through student feedback, these sessions can be readjusted where necessary. In the interim, these issues are
being addressed by a series of workshops by the International and Roehampton Educational Development (RED)
Centres, which aim to raise awareness among academic staff and pose questions, if not initially solutions.
Our recent data have also highlighted that the traditional western stereotypes of students from a Confucian
heritage are unfounded, or the intricacies of the culture have been misunderstood i.e. in relation to learning
methods. Therefore, in order to develop a sense of cultural synergy at Roehampton University it would prove
beneficial for both native staff (possibly through continued professional development and a good practice guide),
and students (possibly via a mentoring scheme), to be re-educated to address such stereotypes and help
international students feel more integrated within the HE system in the UK. Such changes could be implemented
through the International Centre and RED Centre, preparation for which is currently underway.
Emma Kingston and Dr. Heather Forland, International Centre, Roehampton University, London, UK.
8
ECER Conference – University of Crete 2004
References
Ballard, B., & Clanchy, J. (1984). Study Abroad: a manual for Asian students. In D. Watkins, M. Reghi,
& E. Astilla’s (1991) ‘The-Asian-Learner-as-a-Rote-Learner Stereotype: myth or reality?’
Educational Psychology, 11 (1), 21 - 34.
Barker, J. (1997). The Purpose of study, attitudes to study and staff-student relationships. In D.
McNamara & R. Harris’, ‘Overseas Students in Higher Education’, Routledge, London.
Biggs (1999). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. In J. Ryan’s (2000) A Guide to Teaching
International Students, Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development, Oxford, UK.
British Council (2004). Vision 2020: Forecasting international student mobility; a UK perspective. British
Council, Universities UK and IDP Australia.
Brown, M. (2000). Do we need a strategic International Development Function in Universities? In G.
Wisker’s, ‘Good Practice Working with International Students’. SEDA Paper 110, Staff and
Educational Development Association Ltd, Birmingham.
Chan, D., & Drover, G. (1997). Teaching and learning for overseas students: The Hong Kong connection.
In D. McNamara & R. Harris’, ‘Overseas Students in Higher Education’, Routledge, London.
Cook, C. (1979). Pears Cyclopaedia, 88th Edition. Pelham Books Ltd, Suffolk, UK.
Cosh, J. (2000). Supporting the Learning of International Student sin Large Group Teaching. In G.
Wisker’s, ‘Good Practice Working with International Students’, SEDA Paper 110, Staff and
Educational Development Association Ltd, Birmingham.
HESA (2003). Taken from the Higher Education Statistics Agency’s website (www.hesa.ac.uk) on the
13th November 2003.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s Consequences: international differences in work-related values. Sage
Publications, Beverly Hills.
Jin, L., & Cortazzi, M. (2001). Cultural Synergy: Using Chinese strengths in EAP, taken from the
BALEAP PIMs Report website (http://www.baleap.org.uk/pimreports/2001/shu/jincor.htm),
Sheffield Hallam University, on 19th April 2004.
Mackinnon, D., & Manathunga, C. (2003). Going Global with Assessment: What to do when the
dominant culture’s literacy drives assessment. Higher Education Research and Development, 22
(2), 131 – 144.
McNay, I. (1995). Universities going international: choices, cautions and conditions. In C. Parsons,
& B. Fidler’s (2004) ‘De-internationalisation in higher education: the case of UK plc.’ Higher
Education Review, 36 (3), 13 – 32.
Middlehurst, R. (2002). The international context for UK higher education. In C. Parsons, &
B. Fidler’s (2004) ‘De-internationalisation in higher education: the case of UK plc.’ Higher
Education Review, 36 (3), 13 – 32.
Emma Kingston and Dr. Heather Forland, International Centre, Roehampton University, London, UK.
9
ECER Conference – University of Crete 2004
Morson, J. (1990). The Genius that was China; East and West in the Making of the Modern World’.
Overlook Press. Taken from http://www.csupomona.edu/~plin/15201/confucian2.html on 13th
November 2003.
Parsons, C., & Fidler, B. (2004) De-internationalisation in Higher Education: the case of UK plc. Higher
Education Review, 36 (3), 13 – 32.
Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to Teach in Higher Education. Routledge, London
Rastall, P. (2004). The Chinese Learner in Higher Education: transition and quality
issues. ‘Responding to the Needs of the Chinese Learner’ Conference, held at the University of
Portsmouth, 17th – 18th July.
Salter-Dvorak, H. (2004). ‘Why can’t I communicate with my British fellow
students?’ Chinese Learner Perspectives; a rationale for pragmatic training. Responding to the
Needs of the Chinese Learner Conference Paper, University of Portsmouth, 16th – 18th July.
Shi, L. (2004). The Successors of Confucianism or a new generation? A
questionnaire study on Chinese students’ culture if learning English. Responding to the Needs of
the Chinese Learner Conference Paper, University of Portsmouth, 16th – 18th July.
Thomas, J. (1983). Cross Cultural Pragmatic Failure. In H. Salter-Dvorak’s (2004)
‘Why can’t I communicate with my British fellow students?’ Chinese Learner Perspectives; a
rationale for pragmatic training. Responding to the Needs of the Chinese Learner Conference
Paper, University of Portsmouth, 16th – 18th July.
Watkins, D., Reghi, M., & Astilla, E. (1991). The Asian-learner-as-a-rote-learner Stereotype: myth or
reality? Educational Psychology, 11 (1), 21 - 34.
Wing On, L. (1996). The cultural context for Chinese learners: conceptions of learning in the Confucian
tradition. In D. A. Watkins & J. B. Biggs’, ‘The Chinese Learner: Cultural, Psychological and
Contextual Influence’, CERC and ACER, Hong Kong.
Wisker, G. (2004). Hanging on in there a long way from home: retention and support for the learning
success of international postgraduates, taken from the Staff and Educational Development Agency’s
website (www.seda.ac.uk) on 14th April 2004.
Wisker, G. (2000). Good Practice Working with International Students. SEDA Paper 110, Staff and
Educational Development Association Ltd, Birmingham.
Emma Kingston and Dr. Heather Forland, International Centre, Roehampton University, London, UK.
10
ECER Conference – University of Crete 2004
Appendices
Appendix 1. Short biographical questionnaire completed by student participants before focus group discussions.
1.
Biographical Information:
If there is insufficient space to complete your answer for any of the questions, please feel free to continue on the reverse of the
sheet.
NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
AGE: ________________________________________________
GENDER (Please Circle): Male / Female
NATIONALITY: _______________________________________________________________________________________
TITLE AND DURATION OF COURSE AT ROEHAMPTON: ________________________________________________
YEAR OF STUDY (Please Circle): 1st / 2nd / 3rd / 4th / Other (Please State) ________________________________________
WHICH COUNTRY DO YOU FEEL YOU BELONG TO: ___________________________________________________
LENGTH OF TIME SPENT IN THE U.K.: ________________________________________________________________
PLEASE DECRIBE ANY PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE OF STUDYING IN AN ENGLISH SPEAKING MEDIUM:
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
PLEASE GIVE A BRIEF OUTLINE OF ANY PREVIOUS EDUCATION, BOTH IN THE U.K. AND ELSEWHERE:
THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME
Emma Kingston and Dr. Heather Forland, International Centre, Roehampton University, London, UK.
11
ECER Conference – University of Crete 2004
Appendix 2. Focus group semi-structured questions to direct discussion (questions in red indicating ideas for
further probing)
Questions for Group Discussion
1.
General:
1a. What is your understanding of ‘learning’?
explore rote/memorisation as pathway to understanding. What do you expect to do during learning?
1b. Why did you choose to undertake the particular course you are enrolled in at this time?
1c. What is the most important outcome of attending university for you? Motive; e.g. basic degree, best possible marks,
real interest in subject area
2.
Lecturers:
2a. What do you expect your lecturers to provide you with (e.g. in terms of materials / support)?
2b. Using the attached sheet (that lists 13 characteristics of effective teaching), please indicate the 5
characteristics you feel are the most important in effective teaching, and the 5 characteristics
that you feel are least important in effective teaching.
2c. In what ways do you expect your lecturers to teach you? 2d. Do your expectations of your lecturer change
depending on the teaching context (e.g. lectures /
workshops / seminars etc.) and if so, how? Are you comfortable with discussions, group work, confrontation, critical
analysis
3.
Plagiarism:
3a. Do you know what Plagiarism is?
3b. What is your understanding of ‘plagiarism’? Is it acceptable?
4.
Assessment:
4a. What types of coursework have you completed before (e.g. reports / essays / presentations etc.)?
4b. Which of these do you find most challenging?
4c. What is your most ‘favoured’ assessment method (e.g. tests / exams / presentations / written
assignments etc.)?
4d. Can you take me through the steps involved in completing a piece of coursework, or in revising
for a test / exam?
4e. Which form of teaching do you feel most comfortable with (e.g. lectures / seminars /
workshops etc.)?
5.
Support:
5a. Academically speaking, what has been your most challenging moment at university?
5b. Have you managed to overcome this challenge and if so, how (e.g. individually / with advice
etc.)?
5c. If you had an academic problem, who or where would you go first for help at Roehampton (e.g.
parents / friends / module tutor / programme conveyor / university academic assessor / RED
Centre: language centre / language tutor / information services / school technician / school
administrator)?
6.
Comparisons with Roehampton:
6a. Are there any differences between the teaching and learning methods used in previous education
at another institute and your time at Roehampton (positive / negative)? If yes; What are they ?Did you choose to
come to the UK partly because of these differences ? Is it a high-risk strategy for you compared to studying at home?
6b. How could we at Roehampton support your learning better?
6c. Are there any ways your time at Roehampton could be improved with regard to any aspect of the
institute (e.g. academic / support services / socially etc.)?
7.
Finally, do you have any other questions or comments?
Emma Kingston and Dr. Heather Forland, International Centre, Roehampton University, London, UK.
12
ECER Conference – University of Crete 2004
Appendix 3. Short questionnaire administered to both academic staff and student participants regarding Ramsden’s 13
characteristics of effective teaching
Characteristics of Effective Teaching
The following form has been developed as part of a research project looking into International students’ (particularly those
students with an East Asian background) transition into higher education in the UK. In order to help the International Centre
with this research, would you be kind enough to spend 5 – 10 minutes of your time in indicating numerically (in the box available
alongside each characteristic), how important you feel each of the 13 characteristics are for effective teaching. Please do so by
numbering each characteristic with a different number between 1 – 13 (1 = most important characteristic of effective teaching –
13 = least important characteristic of effective teaching).
[
] Desire to share love of subject
[
] Ability to make material stimulating and interesting
[
] Facility for engaging with students at their level of understanding
[
] Capacity to explain material plainly and helpfully
[
] Commitment to making clear what has to be understood, at what level and why
[
] Showing concern and respect for students
[
] Commitment to encouraging student independence and experiment
[
] Ability to improvise and adapt to new demands
[
] Using teaching methods that require students to learn actively
[
] Using valid and fair assessment methods
[
] Focus on key concepts and students understanding of them rather than just covering
the ground
[
] Giving high quality feedback on students work
[
] Desire to learn from students how your teaching can be improved
THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME
Emma Kingston and Dr. Heather Forland, International Centre, Roehampton University, London, UK.
13
ECER Conference – University of Crete 2004
Appendix 4. Questionnaire to be emailed to academic staff participants upon the start of the new academic year.
International Students and their Learning.
International students arrive at Roehampton as previously successful learners. The learning
strategies they employ have enabled them to succeed in their academic career to date and they
arrive here with high expectations.
On arrival at Roehampton international students are required to adjust to a new style of learning
environment, which is usually less directed than in their previous experience. This places a
greater emphasis on independent learning and critical analysis that requires knowledge extension
and speculation rather than knowledge conservation. Recent focus groups carried out at
Roehampton with international students from East Asia (China, Taiwan, Thailand, Japan, Hong
Kong and South Korea) elicited comments such as:
‘I expected a full timetable of classes’
‘in my country we are fed by teachers but here I have to pick up the spoon myself’
‘ we sit and listen at home; here we have to be active in and out of class’
We are aware that international students, just like home students, are individuals and that not all
of them will have the same academic issues. However, the interviews did show enough common
threads to make further exploration worthwhile. We hope that the results will be used to help with
the development of a ‘good practice’ guide for staff.
We would be most grateful if you could take the time to complete this questionnaire and
provide the maximum amount of information. Our initial focus is on students from East
Asia as these make up the largest cohort of international students at Roehampton and are
likely to do so in the future. However, if you have experience of other nationalities and feel
the information would be valuable please include this in your responses.
Many thanks for your time
Heather Forland : International Centre
Emma Kingston: RED Centre
Emma Kingston and Dr. Heather Forland, International Centre, Roehampton University, London, UK.
14
ECER Conference – University of Crete 2004
Staff name:
Masters’ programme of which you are programme convenor:
Number of international students (non UK; include EU students) on your programme by
nationality e.g. 2 Taiwan, 3 Japan, 1 USA etc
1. Do you think there are differences between international students and home students in
terms of their academic performance? If so what are they? Please back this up with any
evidence.
2. How motivated are international students with regard to their academic work at
Roehampton? Can you give examples?
3. Do you think that international students favour particular styles of teaching or learning? Are
there teaching/learning methods that they don’t like?
4. What are the learning strategies employed by your international students?
5. Do international students participate fully in lectures, workshops, etc?
6a. Do international students seek help when necessary?
6b. Do you point them to specialist support such as the RED Centre and
Languages Centre? How successful is this?
7. Do international students bring fresh perspectives and new ideas to your teaching? Please
give examples.
8. Do you adapt your teaching methods to accommodate international students? Please give
examples.
9. Do you do anything specific to help international students adapt to the learning environment
employed in UK Higher Education? If so what?
10a. Do international students prefer particular modes of assessment? Are there some which
they do not like?
10b. Do international students perform better with certain assessment modes than others?
11. Please complete the following sentences:
‘International students bring the following benefits to my academic programme…….’
Emma Kingston and Dr. Heather Forland, International Centre, Roehampton University, London, UK.
15
ECER Conference – University of Crete 2004
‘International students are challenging to have on my programme because……’
12. Using the scale provided, please indicate in relation to your experience with international
students, how well they cope in the following areas:
1= Find extremely challenging; 2= Find fairly challenging; 3= Unsure; 4= Have few problems;
5= Have no problems
1
2
3
4
5
Obtaining support in spoken English
Socialising
Academic writing
Settling in during the 1st term
Adapting to UK HE in general
Relationships with native students
Feeling culturally adrift
Finances
Accommodation
13. Using the same scale as above please indicate how problematic you find the
following aspects with regard to international students’ work.
1 2 3 4 5
Grammatical accuracy such as articles, subject-verb
agreement, verb tense/aspect usage
Complex sentence structures
Range of vocabulary
Overall essay structure
Critical thinking skills
Pronunciation
Oral fluency
THANK YOU FOR YOUR
TIME
Emma Kingston and Dr. Heather Forland, International Centre, Roehampton University, London, UK.
16