RECONSIDERING GRADUATE STUDENT
INTERNATIONAL EXCHANGE: FROM A
SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL
PERSPECTIVE
Jiro Takai, PhD
Department of Educational Psychology
Nagoya University
Exemplary statistics of international
graduate students in advanced countries
 In the United States:
 15% of all grad students are international (temporary





residents)
242,061 in number (2009)
More men (58.9%) than women (41.1%)
Dominantly majoring in Science, Engineering,
Technology fields
About half of all grad students in Engineering, and
Mathematics/Computer Science are international
International students require 7.5 median years to a
PhD, compared to 7.7 for US citizens/permanent
residents
US graduate students by gender and ethnic
group 2009 (Council ofGraduate Schools, 2010)
Am Indian/Alaskan Nat
Asian/Pac Islander
Black/African Am
Men
Women
Hispanic/Latino
White
Temporary Residents
Other
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
US graduate students by field and residential
category 2009 (Council of Graduate Schools, 2010)
Arts/Humanities
Biol/Agric Sci
Business
Engineering
Health Sci
Math/Comp Sci
Phys/Earth Sci
Public Admin
Soc/Behav Sci
Other
US citzn/perm res
Temporary res
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Synopsis
 International graduate students tend to
concentrate in the applied sciences
 They waste little time in degree attainment,
perhaps because they cannot afford to
The hardships of the
international graduate student
 Graduate students are placed in a highly
stressful climate in which they must compete
for resources amongst their peers, be it
scholarships, research funding, assistantship
positions, and even time they receive from
their faculty advisor.
 Given such a climate, graduate students have
less time and energy to allot to befriending
international students, as compared to
undergraduates.
 Graduate
student
 Undergraduate
student
International graduate student
needs
 International students have special needs to
be met, above and beyond those of ordinary
graduate students. These include academic,
financial, living, social, and identity needs.
 They also have needs not shared with their
undergraduate counterparts
Academic needs
 Language and communication
 Learning how to learn
 Learning styles may not be congruent with what
courses offer
 Tutoring needs in area of major
 International students may not be coming in with the
necessary theoretical and methodological foundations
 Faculty guidance
 Academic writing needs
 Writing research reports and manuscripts in the
particular language of education
Financial needs
 Some typical tuition rates for 2011




U of Oxford $22,000 US
U of Tokyo $9,200 US first year
UCLA $34,000
U of Adelaide $26,000
 Living costs
 Can run another $1500 or more a month in most
advanced nations
 The same financial concerns are shared with
local graduate students, but perhaps to a lesser
extent with lower tuition rates
Social needs
 Social adjustment needs
 Cross-cultural adjustment (culture shock)
 Role adjustment (role shock)
 Social support needs (House, 1981)




Emotional support
Appraisal support
Informational support
Instrumental support
 Matching hypothesis of social support (Cutrona,
1990) says the right kind of support is needed from
the right kind of supporter
 International students need support from hosts and
compatriots matching their needs
International student social support
needs and desired source at Time=0mos.
(Takai, 1994)
60
Compatriot
Other international
50
Host
40
30
20
10
0
Data based on
international
students in Japan
within 1 month of
start of studies.
Figures are
percentage of
sample choosing
the support source
as the most
important source
International student social support
needs and desired source at Time=12mos.
(Takai, 1994)
60
50
Compatriot
Other international
Host
40
30
20
10
0
Data based on
international
students in Japan
within 12 months
of start of studies.
Figures are
percentage of
sample choosing
the support source
as the most
important source
Identity needs
 Maintaining individual identity
 Self-concept formation, self-esteem issues
 Maintaining cultural identity
 Integrating own culture identity with identity as a
resident of the host culture
Maintaining cultural identity: Berry’s
(1997) typology of acculturation
YES
NO
Is it important to maintain own cultural
identity?
Is it important to maintain good relations with hosts?
YES
NO
INTEGRATION
SEGREGATION
ASSIMILATION
MARGINALIZATION
The issue
 What social, cultural, institutional, and
interpersonal forces might be there which
may impede the international student from
attaining his/her goals and needs?
Factors hindering academic need
fulfillment
 Competition amongst grad students for




faculty attention and time
Communication (in)competence
Adjustment to a different learning culture
Academic writing deficiencies
Lack of theoretical and methodological
foundations for conducting research
Factors hindering financial
need fulfillment
 Scholarships and fellowships may be
exclusive to nationals
 Currency fluctuations
 Lack of language ability to serve as teaching
assistants
 Competition amongst grad students for very
limited resources
Factors hindering social need
fulfillment
 Lack of time to build interpersonal relationships,
hence social support networks, especially host
networks
 Reliance on existing home networks for support,
thanks to internet technology (Skype, online chat, email)
 These are cyber relationships, not face-to-face
 Fellow graduate students are not interested in
socializing, unlike the undergraduate level
 Overall, social support acquisition may pose a
burden, and international grad students may likely
turn to existing home networks, or to internet to
meet support needs
Factors hindering identity need
fulfillment
 If host supporters are not required, there is little
need to place importance on learning and
respecting the host culture, so compatriots and
home networks become the most important
support providers = segregation
 Adjustment to the cultural, social, and
institutional environment may induce
psychological overburden, hence identity issues
= marginalization
 In most cases, graduate school life leaves little
spare time for cultural and social exchange
The result of needs being
unfulfilled
 The stress from attempting to fulfill academic
needs, combined with the lack of time for social
needs to be addressed, and furthermore, the air
of competition for securing financial resources
may hamper positive intercultural interaction
between host and international students
 Subsequently, both hosts and internationals may
increasingly become aware of the “us” versus
“them” distinction, which we call the
ingroup/outgroup distinction
 This has implications toward identity needs, i.e.
social and individual identities
Would these graduate students be able to
mingle and support each other?
Social Identity Theory
(SIT:
Tajfel and Turner, 1979)
 Social psychological theory forwarded by to explain




intergroup conflict
We have both inclusion and differentiation needs,
hence see ourselves in terms of group membership
in social categories
Those in our group are the ingroup (“us”), those who
are not are the outgroup (“them”): this functions to
clarify our identity, and serve our identity needs
We gain our self-esteem depending on how our
ingroup is evaluated, so we like to keep our ingroup
superior to the outgroup
Because of this, we favor our ingroup while we
disrespect the outgroup
Intergroup contact hypothesis
 Social psychologists have delineated some
specific conditions on which ingroup-outgroup
contact can become constructive, and hence,
successful
 For example, Allport (1954) claims that equalgroup status within the contact situation,
common goals, intergroup cooperation, and
institutional support are the antecedents to
successful exchange
 Amir (1976) suggested the additional conditions
of voluntary participation, and intimacy of the
contact
Applying SIT principles to
international graduate education
 Universities, or individual departments within
universities, must therefore, concern
themselves on how they can structure the
interaction between host and international
students such that the goal of international
educational exchange can be realized at the
micro-level
 Some international education models based
on SIT and contact theory tenets will be
proposed
The solution: Get rid of
categories
 If international students see themselves
differently from the hosts, and vice versa, we
have intergroup contact, and they won’t be able
to see each other beyond their social categories
 The two groups perceive one another as
competing for limited resources, and
cooperation will not likely materialize
 One way around this is to emphasize the fact
that they are all fellow grad students, having
membership in a single, mutual category
 We need to induce recategorization,
decategorization, or subcategorization
Decategorization model
 Person-based contact as opposed to
category-based
 If grad students can become unaware of the
categories of international and host, this can
be actualized
 Decategorization can be institutionally
induced by increasing personal level contact
between students, through collaborative
projects, parties and other informal social
gatherings, study groups
Decategorization model
International
Student
International
Student
Host Student
Host
Student
Recategorization model
 Create a common-identity, superordinate group that




subsumes both international and hosts
No need to deny the existence of these categories,
but make students aware they are part of a larger,
more important category
Emphasizing the laboratory, or the department that
the students belong to should do the trick
Accentuate the notion of teamwork
Students gain a common, more salient membership
within a group consisting of mutually compatible
goals, and their ethnicity or nationality becomes
unimportant
Recategorization model
International
Student
International
Host
Host
Graduate
Student
International
Host
Host
Student
International
Subcategorization model
 Respective category identities remain salient,
but structuring the nature of their
relationship in a manner such as to foster
collaboration and cooperation is induced
 Without the presence of the other group,
nobody can realize any goals
 Mutual interests, and dependence in pursuing
them bring groups together, but if one party
does not live up to the expectations of the
other, this can seriously backfire
Subcategorization model
International
Student
International
Student
Host
Student
Host
Student
Institutionally managing positive
contact and category awareness
 The air of competition may hamper positive
intercultural interaction between host and
international students, and they may
increasingly become aware of the “us” versus
“them” distinction
 Managing the level of awareness of the classes
of students is often overlooked, and this can lead
to unpleasant experiences on both international,
and host students
 Of course, this is easy to say, but when it comes
down to doing it, it’s another story
Some suggestions
 Increase personal level contact between
international and hosts (including graduate
students and faculty)




Hold parties and get-togethers
Encourage collaborative research
Launch some group projects
Induce “buddy systems” or tutoring systems
 “International residences” should be just that,
having host students live with internationals
rather than being exclusive quarters for the latter
 Grants and fellowship not toward individuals, but
to host/international constituted groups
Conclusion
 In this presentation, reference to social
psychological theories of intergroup contact
were made in offering some models of
international exchange at the graduate
student level
 What can be done, at what level remains to
be seen, but the scope of this presentation is
to give food to thought
Thanks for your attention!
Address inquiries to:
Jiro Takai
Nagoya University
[email protected]
Reference







Berry, J.W. (1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied
Psychology: An International Review, 46, 5-34.
Council of Graduate Schools (2010). Graduate enrollment and degrees: 1999 to
2009. Retrieved 2010/09/25 http://www.cgsnet.org/portals/0/pdf/R_ED2009.pdf
Council of Graduate Schools (2010). Research report: Time to degree for doctorate
recipients. Retrieved 2010/09/25
http://www.cgsnet.org/portals/0/pdf/DataSources_2010_03.pdf
Cutrona, C. E. (1990). Stress and social support – In search of optimal matching.
Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 9, 3–14.
House, J.S. (1981). Work, stress and social support. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
Tajfel, H. & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W.
G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations.
Monterey, CA: Brooks-Cole .
Takai, J. (1994). Host contact and cross-cultural adjustment of international
students in Japan. Intercultural/Transcultural Education: Bulletin of Intercultural
Education Society of Japan, 8, 106-116. (In Japanese)