[Paleopsych] J. Studies in Int. Ed.: Wine Is for Drinking, Water Is for Washing: Student Opinions About International Exchange Programs
Premise Checker
checker at panix.com
Tue Feb 1 15:50:21 UTC 2005
Wine Is for Drinking, Water Is for Washing: Student Opinions About
International Exchange Programs
First, the summary from The Chronicle of Higher Education:
A glance at the current issue of
the "Journal of Studies in International Education":
What students value about studying abroad
Students value their study-abroad experiences, but more for the
experience than the study, say two scholars at Pennsylvania
State University at University Park.
Hubert B. Van Hoof, a professor of hospitality management, and
Marja J. Verbeeten, an assistant professor of hospitality
management, surveyed college students who had participated in
international-study programs, including foreign students who had
studied in the United States. The authors found that the
students felt "almost unanimous enthusiasm" for their experience
in terms of their personal development.
Students said they felt that the experience "had brought them a
greater understanding of other cultures" and "had helped them
appreciate their own culture more," the scholars write.
When asked what advice they would give other students
considering studying abroad, the survey respondents' most common
answers "were along the lines of 'Do it!'; 'You'll regret it if
you don't!'; 'Experience as much as possible'; and 'Keep an open
mind.'"
Mr. Van Hoof and Ms. Verbeeten urge more such research to see
what students are getting out of their studies abroad. "It is no
longer sufficient," they write, "for educators to say that the
international-study experience is invaluable and necessary in
the education of our students because they think it is so."
The article, "Wine Is for Drinking, Water Is for Washing:
Student Opinions About International Exchange Programs,"
will be online for a limited time at
http://jsi.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/9/1/42
-----------------------
Wine Is for Drinking, Water Is for Washing: Student Opinions About
International Exchange Programs
Hubert B. Van Hoof Marja J. Verbeeten
Journal of Studies in International Education, Vol. 9 No. 1, Spring 2005
42-61
This article reports on a study done among students who participated in
student exchange programs, both in the United States and other parts of
the world, between January 2001 and May 2003. Issues such as why
students decide to study abroad, why they select a certain institution,
how their home institution compares to a partner institution abroad, and
what they consider to be the relevance of their international experience
were investigated. Students agreed with the literature on the topic to a
large extent and were very positive about the experience. Some
interesting differences of opinion between incoming (to United States)
and outgoing (from United States) students were observed.
Keywords: study abroad; exchange programs; international education
When Penny Barend, a 3rd-year hospitality management student at
Northern Arizona University, arrived in Italy for a year of studies at
the American International University in Florence, she did so with an
open mind. Peers, parents, and professors had told her that this was
going to be the best experience of her life and that living and studying
in Italy were going to be very different from living and studying in
Arizona. Different, she had been told, is not better or worse-it is just
different.
When she sat down for dinner with her host family on her very first
night, she asked for some water with her meal, a common request in the
United States. Yet, the response she got from a 75-year-old Italian was
not what she had expected: "Wine is for drinking, water is for washing,"
he said. With this, she was welcomed to the world of living and
studying abroad, and this incident stuck with her and became the theme
of her valedictorian speech at her graduation cere-
mony 3 years later. She will always look upon a glass of water in a
different light, as will many who heard her speech.
Over the years, we have published several articles on the benefits of
students living, working, and studying abroad (Van Hoof, 1999a, 2000,
2001) and have related these experiences to the benefits of
international education as identified in the literature on the topic.
The most common benefit identified is the student's exposure to
different social and cultural environments (Arndt, 1984; Calleja, 1995;
Lamey, 1990; Saliba, 1995; Swanson, 1969). Also mentioned is the fact
that living in another culture changes one's stereotypes of other
nationalities (Stangor, Jonas, Stroebe, & Hewstone, 1994) and that it
presents one with an alternative view of the world (Remy, Nathan,
Becker, & Torney, 1975). Students acquire a "new-found recognition of
the extent to which their own cultural values and norms differ from
those of their counterparts in their host country"(Rob-erts, 1998, p.
65). That this does not necessarily lead to a truly global perspective
is lamented by some (Anderson, 1990; Van Spaandonck, 1995) but is to be
expected, given the age and maturity levels of the students. Yet, it has
also been found that students who participate in exchange programs tend
to be a little more mature than their peers who did not study abroad
(Frisch, 1990).
The literature has highlighted the role of these international programs
in shaping a rounded, culturally sensitive individual, which happens to
be one of the guiding principles of higher education around the world.
As Vestal (1994) states, "These programs are commonly based on the
conviction that quality education must reflect and encompass knowledge
of diverse societies and cultures as well as the realities of global
interdependence" (p. 15). As such, they fit in well with the drive to
internationalize, which dominates university campuses across the globe
nowadays (Barnett & Wu, 1995; Lawson, White, & Dimitriadis, 1998; Van
Hoof, 1996). A concrete example of this drive to internationalizeis
Harvard University, where students are now expected to have a passport
(which is still not common in the United States), and where
internationalization has been made one of the cornerstones of curricular
developments at the university.
It is safe to assume that the most important benefits of international
education have been identified and that, as De Wit (1997) stated some 6
years ago, the time is ripe to move from the descriptive phase to a more
analytical phase in the study of international education. In 1999, we
analyzed the opinions of U.S. industry recruiters concerning a student's
international experience and found that they did not value the
international experience very highly (Van Hoof, 1999b). This article
reports on a study done among students who participated in exchange
programs. The intent of the study was to compare student opinions about
international exchange programs to those expressed in the literature
and to investigate what students saw as the biggest benefits and
challenges of the experience, why they decided to go abroad, how the
education they received abroad compared to that at their home
institutions, and what, in their minds, the relevance of the experience
was to their personal and professional development.
METHOD AND DATA COLLECTION
The survey that provided the data for the study was conducted during the
months of March, April, and May 2003 among 1,487 undergraduate students
in the database of the International Office at Northern Arizona
University. These students had studied abroad during the period of
January 2001 to May 2003, were either incoming (to the United States) or
outgoing (from the United States), and represented numerous majors and
disciplines, as well as various age levels.
Questionnaire Design
The questionnaire was designed to gain insights into the perceptions of
students about their study abroad experiences. As stated earlier, its
intent was to determine whether students corroborated the opinions
expressed in the literature on international education. The payoffs of
international education as identified in the literature can be
summarized as follows: (a) exposure to different social and cultural
environments; (b) changing of stereotypes that might exist; and (c)
students become more mature because they live in other cultures and
become well-rounded, culturally sensitive adults. Questions such as,
"Why did you decide to study abroad as an exchange student?" "What do
you consider the greatest benefit of studying abroad?" and "What do you
consider the greatest challenge of studying abroad?" for instance,
directly addressed some of these issues (see Appendix).
Of secondary relevance was the fact that this survey provided the
administrators and educators at this particular university with
valuable information about their own performance in educating and taking
care of international students, as well as with information about their
exchange partners.
It was decided to use a Web-based survey format in this study. The
primary reason for doing so was that it could be distributed to a large
target audience at a much lower cost and more quickly than a traditional
survey (Couper, 2000; Schonland & Williams, 1996). Moreover, data
collection and conversion could be done automatically, and the target
audience could be encouraged by meansof a personal e-mail message. Its
most important benefits, though, were the convenience for both the
respondents and the researchers and the fact that it was felt that
respondents in this particular age group would be more likely to respond
to an electronic format than to any of the more traditional survey
tools.
An important concern about Web surveys is their low response rate,
especially when sent out to the general population (Schaefer & Dillman,
1998; Tse, 1998). Yet, in this case, the population under study was
relatively small, and its members could be reached at their personal
e-mail addresses. It was expected that these students would be
interested in sharing their opinions about their semester abroad
experiences, which was supported by the relatively high response rate
obtained.
The questionnaire was a four-page, self-administered instrument (see
Appendix). It was estimated that it would take respondents about 10
minutes to complete. Most of the questions were closed-ended, requiring
a choice from a number of alternatives presented.
In the first part of the survey, respondents were asked to provide
demographic information. They were asked to provide information about
their gender, their country of origin, the country where they had
studied abroad, the institution they had studied at, their academic
status (freshman, sophomore, etc.), their majors at their home
institution and at their exchange institution, and how long theyhad
studied abroad.
The second part of the survey was divided into six sections and examined
the students' perceptions about their international studies and
experiences. In the first section, two questions asked them what their
reasons were for studying abroad and why they had selected the
institution in particular. They were asked to compare their exchange
programs to their home institutions by means of rating them on a
5-point Likert-type scale. The questions looked at (a) academic level of
difficulty, (b) care for their general needs as students, (c) housing
arrangements, and (d) overall levels of organization and structure at
the exchange institution.
The third section examined what they liked most and least about their
exchange institution and what they perceived to be the main difference
between studying at home and abroad. Three questions (once again on a
5-point scale)in the fourth section then asked them to rate the
relevance of their semester abroad to future job opportunities, their
academic program at home, and their own personal development.
The fifth section contained four questions. The first two asked the
respondents if they would study abroad again at the same institution
and if they would study abroad again at another institution. Then they
rated the overall quality of the academic program abroad and how they
felt about the overall experience. The final section then asked them to
describe what they felt were the greatest benefits and challenges of
studying abroad and what advice they would give to students who were
also considering studying abroad. This was done in an open-ended format.
Sample Design, Data Collection, and Limitations
Sample design. As stated earlier, all 1,487 undergraduate students who
were in the database of the International Office at Northern Arizona
University were selected to participate in this study for the following
reasons:
1. The database was readily available and up-to-date at the university's
International Office, with e-mail addresses of all the respondents being
part of the database;
2. The International Office was very willing to participate in the
study, as they would obtain valuable information about their own
performance at the university they represented;
3. The students' interest in the topic and their willingness to complete
the survey were expected to be high, due to the nature of the
experience;
4. Respondents could be contacted easily by means of e-mail.
Data collection. On February 26, 2003, a letter signed by both the
director of the International Office at Northern Arizona University and
the researchers was sent to a pilot group of 60 students. In the letter,
the respondents were requested to cooperate and were directed to a Web
site that contained the survey. One week later, 40 pilot group
respondents had completed the survey. As there were no major adjustments
to be made based on the feedback from the pilot group, the letter was
then sent to all the remaining students in the database on March 7,
2003, by means of e-mail. On March 24, 2003, a reminder was sent out.
The Web site with the survey was kept open until the end of the spring
2003 semester, May 9, 2003. At that time, a total of 353 students had
responded to the survey, a 23.74% response. Given the concern that Web
surveys generally tend to generate a low response rate, this was deemed
very good.
Limitations. The main limitation of this study is the fact that it was
based on a database of students at only one university. All outgoing
students studied at one of the 10 colleges and schools at Northern
Arizona University, and all incoming students came to the university
from its established network of partners abroad. Opinions therefore say
more about Northern Arizona University and its foreign partners than
about other universities, and the results cannot be generalized beyond
the scope of the study. Yet, with incoming students coming from 22
different countries, outgoing students going to 23 different countries,
and more than 50 different majors represented in the sample, the
results can be considered characteristic of some general tendencies and
representative of opinions of students worldwide.
This article will first discuss the demographic data and the descriptive
results of the analyses. After that, it will look at the outcomes of
various comparative analyses and describe whether any observed
differences between groups in the descriptive section were significant.
Finally, it will summarize some of the predominant opinions about the
benefits and challenges of studying abroad and offer some suggestions
for further research. All data analyses were done using SPSS 11.0.
DESCRIPTIVE RESULTS
Demographics
Of the 353 students who responded to the survey, 250 (70.8%) were female
and 103 (29.2%) were male. As stated earlier, these students came from
22 different countries, with a large majority coming from the United
States (80.7%). Among these outgoing American students, the largest
numbers went to such countries as the Netherlands, Germany, the United
Kingdom, Spain, Australia, and Mexico. But there were also students who
went to Costa Rica, Chile, Malta, Korea, Japan, Ireland, Italy, Russia,
China, and Sweden, for instance.
Among the incoming students, Germany and the Netherlands were most
heavily represented in the sample. Examples of other countries
represented were the United Kingdom, Australia, Mexico, Spain, France,
Czech Republic, China, Malaysia, Bulgaria, Belgium, and the Ukraine. Of
course, these countries of origin reflect the international contacts of
the university. Yet, they are also indicative of the multitude of
nationalities in the sample.
A large majority (93.7%) of the respondents were juniors (3rd year) or
seniors (4th year) at their home institutions, reflecting a trend among
universities not to send students abroad very early on in their
academic careers. The number of majors represented was considerable,
with more than 50 distinctly different majors or fields of study being
identified. These majors ranged from business and management to art,
from chemistry to education, from languageto history, and from ceramics
to journalism. Most of the respondents had studied abroad for one
semester (63.0%), with the remainder either going for two semesters
(28.7%) or three or more (8.3%) (see Table 1).
Reasons for Studying Abroad
In the first section of the survey, the respondents were asked why they
had decided to study abroad and were requested to rank a number of
distinctly different reasons in order of importance. The three most
important reasons for studying abroad identified were as follows:
1. It is/was a good opportunity to live in another culture;
2. It is/was a good opportunity to travel;
3. I liked the country my exchange program was located in.
Table 1 Student Demographics (N = 353)
N Valid %
Gender
Male 103 29.2
Female 250 70.8
Incoming/outgoinga
Incoming 32 9.1
Outgoing 321 90.9
Academic statusa
Freshman 3 .9
Sophomore 17 5.3
Junior 98 30.5
Senior 203 63.2
Durationa
One semester 213 63.0
Two semesters 97 28.7
Three or more semesters 28 8.3
a. Total N is not 353 because of missing values for the variable.
When asked why they had selected the particular institution abroad, the
three most important reasons were as follows:
1. It was available as a partner at my home institution;
2. I liked the country the program was located in;
3. People I know also go/went there.
Assessments: Academics, Care, Housing, and Organization at the Receiving
Institution
In four questions, the survey then asked the respondents to rate the
academic level of difficulty, care for their needs as a student,
housing, and organization/ structure at the exchange institution as
compared to their home institution. This was done on a 5-point
Likert-type scale, with 1 being much worse/much easier,3 being
same,and5being much better/much more difficult. This scale was
primarily used to allow for comparative analysis of opinions later.
A majority of the respondents (59.0%) felt that the academic level of
difficulty of the program abroad was the same (25.5%) or easier (33.5%)
as compared to their home institutions, whereas 41.0% felt that
academics were more demanding abroad. The mean rating was 3.02, with a
standard deviation of 1.05. In terms of the care they received for their
needs as students (such as staff availability, academic advising, and
counseling), 39.2% of them rated it as better, 30.0% felt it was the
same, and 30.8% felt it was worse than at home, a very even distribution
(M = 3.08, SD = 1.18).
Housing is always a major concern for students when they go abroad, and
not only for them but also, for instance, for their parents. In this
case, 45.2% of the respondents felt that their housing arrangements were
better than at home, 25.7% felt it was the same, and only 29.2% felt
they were worse than at home (M =3.25, SD = 1.07). Finally, when asked
how they assessed the overall level of structure and organization at
their exchange institution, 26.4% rated it as better, 33.0% felt it was
the same, and 42.6% thought it was worse than at home (M = 2.81, SD =
1.12) (see Table 2).
Relevance of the Experience
Three questions asked the respondents to rate the relevance of their
international experience to future job opportunities, the academic
program at their home institution, and their own personal development.
It is reasonable to assume that it would be difficult for students at
this stage of their lives to assessthe relevance of the international
experience on future job opportunities and their own personal
development accurately. Yet, these questions were included for various
reasons. First, the answers to these questions could be used to
reinforce opinions expressed in other questions about the importance the
study abroad respondents attach to the experience. Second, the answers
could also be used to provide some insight into whether young adults
think about the consequences of their international experience to their
personal and professional lives and place the experience in a much
broader perspective. Third, the answers to these questions could be
compared to opinions expressed in the literature.
Ratings were on a 5-point scale again, with 1 being completely
irrelevant,3 being relevant,and5being extremely relevant. When asked to
rate the relevance of the experience to their future job opportunities,
58.1% of the students rated it as very or extremely relevant, 33.1%
rated it relevant, and only 8.9% felt itwas irrelevant (M = 3.75, SD =
.98). With regard to their academic program at home, the ratings were
48.5% very or extremely relevant, 37.5% relevant, and 14.0% irrelevant
(M = 3.52, SD = 1.06). Yet, when it came to determining what it had
meant to their personal development, the respondents were most
enthusiastic: 67.7% considered it extremely relevant, 23.0% felt it was
very relevant, and only 2 respondents (.6%) considered it irrelevant.
This almost unanimous enthusiasm was reflected in the mean rating of
4.57 and a standard deviation of .69 (see Table 3).
Table 2 Student Assessment of Academic Difficulty, Care, Housing, and
Organization: Exchange Institution Compared to Home Institution
Exchange Program Compared to Home Na Valid % M/SD
Academic level of difficulty
Much easier 28 7.9 M: 3.02
Easier 82 24.9 SD: 1.05
Same 84 25.5
More difficult 124 37.7
Much more difficult 11 3.3
Level of care for your general needs
Much worse 39 11.8 M: 3.08
Worse 63 19.1 SD: 1.18
Same 99 30.0
Better 91 27.6
Much better 38 11.5
Housing arrangements
Much worse 10 3.1 M: 3.25
Worse 85 26.0 SD: 1.07
Same 84 25.7
Better 108 33.0
Much better 40 12.2
Overall level of organization/structure
Much worse 42 12.7 M: 2.81
Worse 92 27.9 SD: 1.12
Same 109 33.0
Better 62 18.8
Much better 25 7.6
a. Total N is not 353 because of missing values for the variable.
Would You Do It Again?
Under the heading of "Would you do it again?" the respondents' opinions
and feelings about their semesters abroad were further analyzed. They
were asked, if it were possible, whether they would study abroad again
at the same institution and at another institution. Moreover, they had
the option here to indicate why they would or would not choose to repeat
the experience, providing important information on the quality of the
programs and the experience to organizersof those programs.
Two thirds (61.1%) of the respondents indicated that they would study
again at the same institution, and 95.0% of them said that they would
study abroad again at another institution-a ringing endorsement, yet
more so for the study abroad experience than for the institution they
studied at. A sampling of the rea
Table 3 The Relevance of the Study Abroad Experience
Relevance of Semester Abroad Experience to Na Valid % M/SD
Future job opportunities
Completely irrelevant 4 1.4 M: 3.75
Irrelevant 22 7.4 SD: 0.98
Relevant 98 33.1
Very relevant 91 30.7
Extremely relevant 81 27.4
Academic program at home
Completely irrelevant 12 4.0 M: 3.52
Irrelevant 30 10.0 SD: 1.06
Relevant 112 37.5
Very relevant 82 27.4
Extremely relevant 63 21.1
Your personal development
Completely irrelevant 1 .3 M: 4.57
Irrelevant 1 .3 SD: 0.69
Relevant 26 8.7
Very relevant 69 23.0
Extremely relevant 203 67.7
a. Total N is not 353 because of missing values for the variable.
sons for not wanting to go back to the same school includes such
comments as "courses are irrelevant," "been there, done that," "I got
bored there," "too unorganized," and "I would like to get a broader
perspective and experience something new."
By the same token, some of the reasons that students overwhelmingly
endorsed the experience rather than the individual programs were, "the
dynamics of an exchange teach you a lot," "I realize there are more
opportunities now," and "my personal development was incredible, and I
want to see more."
Overall Ratings
Finally, when it was time to ask for some overall assessments, the
respondents looked at the overall quality of the academic program they
did abroad, and the overall quality of the experience in general, on a
scale where 1 = very poor,3= neutral,and5= outstanding. As became
apparent throughout all of the other questions, the study abroad
experience was perceived as having a much larger effect on the students'
personal developments than on their academic careers, as 71.9% of them
rated the overall quality of the academic program as good or
outstanding (M = 3.84, SD = .92). Nearly all of them (96.2%) felt that
the quality of the overall study abroad experience was good or
outstanding (M = 4.65, SD = .57).
COMPARATIVE RESULTS
To determine if any of the observed differences of opinion were
significant, t tests were used to compare the groups. The groups
compared in this sample were males and females, and incoming versus
outgoing students, which was by far the most important comparison.
The Effect of Gender on Perceptions
The study first looked at whether the gender of the respondent had any
significant effect on his or her perceptions about the study abroad
experience. As there were two groups separated based on the value of a
single variable (male-female), and as the level of data provided by the
questions using the 5-point Likert-type scale was ordinal, this analysis
was done by means of t tests. In all instances, the null hypotheses
assumed that the population means were equal, and the alpha levelwas
setat.05.
The study found only one significant difference of opinion between male
and female students. It was found that female students rated the level
of care for their personal needs as a student at the exchange
institution significantly higher than males. With a significance score
of .050, the null hypothesis of equality of mean ratings could be
rejected. In none of the other questions was there a significant
difference of opinions between males and females (see Table 4).
Although hardly any of the differences of opinion were found to be
significant, a closer look at the mean ratings of males and females, as
expressed in Table 4, shows that in all cases, the female ratings were
higher than those ofthe males, suggesting that female students were
generally more appreciative of many of the aspects of the study abroad
experience than males.
The Effect of Incoming Versus Outgoing
The obvious and most important comparison this study performed was to
look at the differences of opinion between incoming and outgoing
students. Once again, t tests were used to determine if any of the
differences of opinions were significant. The alpha level was set at
.05, and the null hypotheses assumed equality of mean ratings.
In this case, the study noticed several significant differences of
opinion between the two groups. First, it was found that incoming
students rated the overall quality of the academic programs in the
United States significantly lower
Table 4 Effect of Gender on Perceptions
Exchange Program Compared to Home Na M SD F Sig.
Academic level of difficulty
Male 96 2.93 .976 .698 .404
Female 229 3.07 1.084
Level of care for your general needs
Male 96 3.06 1.103 3.862 .050**
Female 230 3.10 1.220
Housing arrangements
Male 93 3.12 1.051 .213 .645
Female 230 3.31 1.073
Overall level of organization/structure
Male 96 2.75 1.086 .057 .811
Female 230 2.83 1.122
Relevance of Semester
Abroad Experience to Na M SD F Sig.
Future job opportunities
Male 87 3.62 .967 .239 .626
Female 206 3.81 .988
Academic program at home
Male 87 3.46 .986 1.376 .242
Female 209 3.53 1.083
Personal development
Male 87 4.47 .696 1.795 .181
Female 210 4.61 .692
Rate the quality of the academic
program you did abroad
Male 84 3.71 .964 1.029 .311
Female 194 3.89 .907
Rate the quality of the overall
experience abroad
Male 84 4.63 .576 .300 .584
Female 197 4.65 .565
a. Total N is not 353 because of missing values for the variable.
**Significant at the .05 level.
than students who had studied outside of the United States (F prob. =
.005). Second, incoming students rated the quality of the housing
arrangements in the United States significantly higher than their peers
who had studied outside of the United States (F prob. = .004). And
finally, incoming students rated the relevance of their semester abroad
experience to their academic program at home significantly higher than
their peers from the United States who had left the country (F prob. =
.17) (see Table 5). The latter was somewhat surprising, given that
incoming students had rated the quality of the academic program
significantly lower at an earlier stage.
CONCLUSION
The study of international education has started to move from a purely
theoretical and conceptual approach to a more analytical approach, a
sign that international education has not only gained importance as a
field of study but also has become an important part of many university
curricula all over the world. As more and more institutions have begun
to mandate an international experience in the degree programs of their
students, be it in the form of a semester of studies or an industry
internship, more quantitative and qualitative research is needed to
improve the quality of the programs offered and to test the validity of
the assumptions on which those programs are built. It is no longer
sufficient for educators to say that the international study experience
is invaluable and necessary in the education of our students because
they think it is so. These opinions have to be backed up with hard
facts, and we have to move away from mere anecdotal evidence.
There is a wealth of information that needs to be explored empirically,
and this study is only at the very tip of that iceberg. It is important
for the study of international education to start analyzing the
perceptions of the students involved in such programs, not only to
corroborate predominant ideas aboutthe benefits and challenges of
international education but also for purely practical reasons. The
practitioners in the field, those who administer international programs
and maintain international relationships on behalf of their
universities, need to know what students think about their product
offerings. They need tobe aware of consumer sentiments when they market
and sell these programs to future respondents and in making
modifications to existing programs, and those decisions need to be based
on facts.
The results of this study can be used in several ways. They can be used
not only as a means to test the validity of our theoretical assumptions
about international education, a means to determine whether student
perceptions agree with the literature. It can also be a practical tool
in the day-to-day administration of the exchange programs. Whereas the
results of this study will be of particular interest to the
International Office at Northern Arizona University, the results of
further research and similar studies at other institutions can benefit
practitioners worldwide.
Table 5 Effect of Incoming and Outgoing Status on Perceptions
Exchange Program Compared to Home Na M SD F Sig.
Academic level of difficulty
In 26 2.65 1.129 .128 .721
Out 203 3.06 1.039
Level of care for your general needs
In 26 3.08 1.093 .491 .484
Out 304 3.08 1.191
Housing arrangements
In 25 3.32 .802 8.392 .004***
Out 302 3.25 1.088
Overall level of organization/structure
In 26 2.46 .905 1.227 .269
Out 304 2.84 1.128
Relevance of Semester
Abroad Experience to Na M SD F Sig.
Future job opportunities
In 23 3.87 1.180 .304 .582
Out 273 3.74 .966
Academic program at home
In 23 3.57 1.343 5.748 .017**
Out 276 3.51 1.032
Personal development
In 24 4.67 .868 .406 .525
Out 276 4.57 .676
Rate the quality of the academic
program you did abroad
In 23 3.39 1.196 8.059 .005***
Out 258 3.88 .888
Rate the quality of the overall
experience abroad
In 23 4.74 .449 2.802 .095
Out 261 4.64 .575
a. Total N is not 353 because of missing values for the variable.
**Significant at the .05 level. *** Significant at the .01 level.
This study found that students generally corroborate what the literature
on the topic has identified as being the most important benefits of
international education. They felt that an international education
first and foremost benefited them personally and that it helped them in
becoming more mature and worldly adults, compassionate in the face of
cultural difference, and able to live and work in environments that are
dissimilar to what they are used to at home. As might have been
expected, their interest in studying abroad was piqued more by the
location of their host institution and by the ability to travel and see
something of the world than by academics.
Incoming students placed a little more emphasis on the academic aspects
of an international education than outgoing students, it seemed, and
they were more critical of their exchange institution in that regard.
Yet, at the same time they were significantly more impressed with the
structure and housing arrangements at their U.S. exchange university,
as compared to what they experienced at their home institutions.
When asked what they saw as the greatest benefits of studying abroad, by
far the most common comments were that it had brought them a greater
understanding of other cultures, that it had helped them appreciate
their own culture more, that it enabled them to learn more about
themselves, and that it had enriched them personally. The words and
ideas that came up most often in the many challenges that were
described were sentiments like "adapting," "adjusting,""being away from
home," "breaking stereotypes," "culture shock," "language barrier,"
"managing," "staying patient," and "trying to assimilate." Yet, even
though these were seen as challenges, they are, in many ways, not
negatives at all and valuable to the development of the student, both
personally and academically.
In terms of what advice they would give to students considering going
abroad, the most common answers were along the lines of "Do it!";
"You'll regret it if you don't!"; "Experience as much as possible"; and
"Keep an open mind." What better endorsement for international education
than that? We are doing the right thing in enabling students to live,
work, and study in other cultures and societies and in helping them
understand what water and wine are really for, and our students agree
with us wholeheartedly.
APPENDIX Survey: Student Perceptions About International Exchange
Programs
Demographic Data
1. What is your gender?
Male Female
2. What is your country of origin?
3. In which country did you spend your study abroad?
Australia Mexico
Chile Netherlands
France Spain
Germany United Kingdom
Ireland USA
Japan Other (please specify)
4. What is the institution you study/studied at as an exchange student?
5. What is your academic status?
Freshman
Sophomore
Junior
Senior
6. What is/was your major at your home institution?
7. What was/is your major at your exchange institution?
8. How long do/did you study abroad?
One semester
Two semesters
More than two semesters
Perceptions
1.
Please rate the following in order of importance (1 = highest, 7 =
lowest) as reasons why you decided to study abroad as an exchange
student.
It could be used as part of my degree program
It is/was a good opportunity to travel
My parents/relatives suggested I should go
I went because I was interested in the academic institution/program
abroad
It was a good opportunity to live in another culture
I liked the country the program was located in
Other (please specify)
2.
Why did you select the particular institution you studied at as an
exchange student?
I had heard of its reputation
People I know also go/went there
I liked the country it is/was located in
It was available as a partner of my home institution
I could not go anywhere else
It was a cheap alternative
Other (please specify)
3.
How would you assess the academic level of difficulty of the exchange
program you participate(d) in, as compared to that of your home
institution?
Much Easier Easier Same More Difficult Much More Difficult
4.
How would you assess the level of care for your general needs as a
student (academic advising, housing, availability of staff, for
instance) at your exchange institution as compared to your home
institution?
Much Less Less Same Better Much Better
5.
How would you assess the housing arrangements at your exchange
institution as compared to those
at your home institution? Much Worse Worse Same Better Much Better
6.
How would you assess the overall level of organization and structure at
your exchange institution,
as compared to that at your home institution? Much Worse Worse Same
Better Much Better
7.
In general, what do/did you like best about your exchange institution?
8.
In general, what do/did you like least about your exchange institution?
9.
What was the main difference between studying at your home institution
and studying at your exchange institution?
10.
How would you assess the relevance of your semester abroad to your
future job opportunities?
Completely Extremely Irrelevant Irrelevant Relevant Very Relevant
Relevant
11.
How would you assess the relevance of your semester abroad to your
academic program at your home institution?
Completely Extremely Irrelevant Irrelevant Relevant Very Relevant
Relevant
12.
How would you assess the relevance of your semester abroad to your
personal development?
Completely Extremely Irrelevant Irrelevant Relevant Very Relevant
Relevant
13.
If it were possible, would you study abroad again at the same
institution? Yes No Why?
14.
If it were possible, would you study abroad again at another
institution? Yes No Why?
15.
How would you rate the overall quality of the academic program you did
abroad? Very Poor Poor Neutral Good Outstanding
16.
How would you rate the quality of the overall experience abroad? Very
Poor Poor Neutral Good Outstanding
17.
What do/did you consider to be the greatest benefit of studying abroad?
18.
What do/did you consider to be the greatest challenge of studying
abroad?
19.
What advice would you give to students who are considering studying
abroad?
Thank You!
REFERENCES
Anderson, L. (1990). A rationale for global education. In K. A. Tye
(Ed.), Global education: From thought to action (pp. 13-34). Alexandria,
VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Arndt, R. T. (1984). Rethinking international education. In W. C. Olson
& L.D. Howell (Eds.), International education: The unfinished agenda
(pp. 1-39). Indianapolis, IN: White River Press.
Barnett, G. A., & Wu, R. Y. (1995). The international student exchange
network: 1970 & 1989. Higher Education, 30, 353-368.
Calleja, J. (1995). International education: A common direction for our
future. In J. Calleja (Ed.), International education and the university
(pp. 41-57). Bristol, PA: Jessica Kingsley.
Couper, M. P. (2000). Web surveys: A review of issues and approaches.
Public Opinion Quarterly, 64(4), 464-494.
De Wit, H. (1997). Studies in international education: A research
perspective. Journal of Studies in International Education, 1(1), 1-8.
Frisch, N. C. (1990). An international nursing student exchange program:
An educational experience that enhanced student cognitive development.
Journal of Nursing Education, 29(1), 10-12.
Lamey, S. L. (1990). Global education: A conflict of images. In K. A.
Tye (Ed.), Global education: From thought to action (pp. 49-66).
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Lawson, D., White, D. S., & Dimitriadis, S. (1998). International
businesseducation and technology-based active learning:
Student-reported benefit evaluations. Journal of Marketing Education,
20(2), 141-148.
Remy, R. C., Nathan, J. A., Becker, J. M., & Torney, J. V. (1975).
International learning and international education in a global age.
Washington, DC: National Council for the Social Studies.
Roberts, E. H. (1998). The innocents abroad. Do students face
international internships unprepared? Cornell Hotel and Restaurant
Administration Quarterly, 39(4), 64-69.
Saliba, M. (1995). An institutional framework for international
education. In
J. Calleja (Ed.), International education and the university (pp.
58-80). Bristol, PA: Jessica Kingsley.
Schaefer, D. R., & Dillman, D. A. (1998). Development of standard e-mail
methodology: Results of an experiment. Public Opinion Quarterly, 62(3),
378397.
Schonland, A. M., & Williams, P. W. (1996). Using the Internet for
travel and tourism survey research: Experiences from the Net traveler
survey. Journal of Travel Research, 35(2), 81-87.
Stangor, C., Jonas, K., Stroebe, W., & Hewstone, M. (1994). Influence of
student exchange on national stereotypes, attitudes, and perceived group
variability. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 663-675.
Swanson, G. I. (1969). International education: Portents for the future.
In F. R. Paulsen (Ed.), Changing dimensions in international education
(pp. 1-8). Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Tse, A. C. (1998). Comparing the response rate, speed and response
quality of two methods of sending questionnaires: E-mail vs. mail.
Journal of the Market Research Society, 40(4), 353-361.
Van Hoof, H. B. (1996). Studeren in de Poort tot de Canyon [Studying in
the gate to the canyon]. Transfer: Journal for International Cooperation
in Higher Education and Research, 4(2), 28-29.
Van Hoof, H. B. (1999a). The international student experience: A US
industry perspective. Journal of Studies in International Education,
3(2), 57-71.
Van Hoof, H. B. (1999b). Why send students abroad? A comparison of the
opinions of hospitality industry recruiters on international
internships and international exchange programs. FIU Hospitality
Review, 17(1&2), 63-72.
Van Hoof, H. B. (2000). The international internship as part of the
hospitality management curriculum: Combining work experience with
international exposure. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Education,
12(1), 6-9, 15.
Van Hoof, H. B. (2001). International internship exchange: Using
existing resources. NAFSA International Educator, 10(1), 7-9.
Van Spaandonck, M. (1995). Multicultural and global education. In J.
Calleja (Ed.), International education and the university (pp. 243-260).
Bristol, PA: Jessica Kingsley.
Vestal, T. M. (1994). International education: Its history and promise
for today. Westport, CT: Praeger.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Hubert B. Van Hoof, Ph.D., is the director of the School of Hospitality
Management at Penn State University. Prior to his July 1, 2004,
appointment at Penn State, he was the assistant dean at the School of
Hotel and Restaurant Management at Northern Arizona University where he
was responsible for developing and maintaining the school's
international contacts. He has published extensively on the benefits of
international education, in particular with regard to hospitality
management education.
Marja J. Verbeeten, Ed.D., is an assistant professor at the School of
Hospitality Management at Penn State University. A native of the
Netherlands, she has taught at various universities in the United States
in the area of hospitality management, with particular emphases in
information technology and managerial accounting and cost control.
During the fall 2003 semester, she taught as a visiting professor at
the International University of Applied Sciences, Bad Honnef-Bonn in
Germany. She was a faculty member in the Summer Studies in Europe
program at Northern Arizona University from 1994 to 2004.
More information about the paleopsych
mailing list