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, RoehamptonUniversity, London, United Kingdom.

Email:

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

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 effective form of learning[1] (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).

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.

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 RoehamptonUniversity. 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 ‘De-internationalisation’. 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).

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 de-internationalisation.