Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
Dr.
Clayton
Smith
Vice‐Provost,
Students
and
International
Researcher
Tanya
Demjanenko
Researcher,
author
University
of
Windsor
2011
Table
of
Contents
Table
of
Contents
List
of
Tables
List
of
Figures
List
of
Abbreviations
Executive
Summary
Pre‐Study
Environmental
Scan
Pilot
Study
2
4
6
8
9
14
18
18
19
19
20
20
20
21
21
22
23
26
27
27
28
28
Purpose,
Process,
Methodology ........................................................................................................................... 18
Insights......................................................................................................................................................................... 18
Attendance
Academics
Finances
Misinformation
Racism
&
Discrimination
Missed
Connections
Other
Plans
Cultural
Adjustment
Psychological
Issues
Summary...................................................................................................................................................................... 22
Literature
Review
Rising
Numbers ......................................................................................................................................................... 23
Benefits
of
International
Students
on
Campus ............................................................................................... 23
Institutional
Challenges.......................................................................................................................................... 23
The
International
Student
Voice ......................................................................................................................... 24
The
Faculty
Voice...................................................................................................................................................... 25
Variables
for
Academic
Success........................................................................................................................... 26
TOEFL
Study
Discipline
Finances
Cultural
Adjustment
Social
Supports
Factors
Contributing
to
Retention ...................................................................................................................... 29
Required
Changes..................................................................................................................................................... 30
Summary...................................................................................................................................................................... 30
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
3
Full‐Year
Study
32
Students
Service
Providers
&
Faculty
32
33
36
Emergent
Theme
A:
Language
Emergent
Theme
B:
Culture
Emergent
Theme
C:
Racism
&
Discrimination
36
37
39
Emergent
Theme
A:
Language
Emergent
Theme
B:
Culture
Emergent
Theme
C:
Racism
&
Discrimination
40
41
43
45
46
48
48
Purpose ........................................................................................................................................................................ 32
Recruitment................................................................................................................................................................ 32
Methodology............................................................................................................................................................... 34
Participants ................................................................................................................................................................ 35
Summary
of
Results
Faculty
Interviews .................................................................................................................................................... 36
Service
Provider
Interviews ................................................................................................................................. 40
Student
Focus
Groups.............................................................................................................................................. 45
Emergent
Theme
A:
Culture
Emergent
Theme
B:
Frustration,
Disorientation,
&
Confusion
Emergent
Theme
C:
Facilities
&
Services
Emergent
Theme
D:
Racism
&
Discrimination
Faculty
Surveys.......................................................................................................................................................... 49
Service
Provider
Surveys ....................................................................................................................................... 69
Learning
from
Ourselves:
Community
Models
of
Success .......................................................................... 82
Limitations
Conclusions
Appendices
84
86
89
98
A:
IS
Focus
Group
Discussion
Questions ........................................................................................................... 89
B:
IS
Recruitment
E­Mail......................................................................................................................................... 90
C:
IS
Recruitment
Poster......................................................................................................................................... 91
D:
Student
Groups
Interview
Questions............................................................................................................ 92
E:
Service
Provider
Recruitment
E­Mail............................................................................................................ 93
F:
Faculty
Recruitment
E­Mail .............................................................................................................................. 94
G:
Faculty
Interview
Questions ............................................................................................................................ 95
H:
Service
Provider
Interview
Questions ......................................................................................................... 96
I:
Working
Group
Members
List........................................................................................................................... 97
References
3
LIST
OF
TABLES
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Table
ES‐1.
Summary
of
themes
emerging
from
pilot
study
Table
ES‐2.
Summary
of
factors
identified
in
literature
review
section
deemed
influential
to
international
student
retention
rates
Table
ES‐3.
Summary
of
the
full­year
study
qualitative
emergent
themes
by
participant
Table
ES‐4.
Summary
of
the
full­year
study
survey
emergent
themes
by
participant
LITERATURE
REVIEW
Table
LR‐1.
Summary
of
Tas’s
(2004)
nine
reasons
students
gave
for
leaving
a
university
Table
LR‐2.
Faculty
Perceptions
of
IS’
academically
detrimental
behaviors
and
IS’
perceptions
of
most
difficult
adjustment
areas
FULL­YEAR
STUDY
Table
FYS‐1.
Summary
of
IS
focus
group
discussions
participant
criteria
in
Table
FYS‐2.
Summary
of
research
activity
involving
IS
for
September
2010
–
April
2011
Table
FYS‐3.
Summary
of
research
activity
involving
service
providers
for
September
2010
–
April
2011
Table
FYS‐4.
Summary
of
research
activity
involving
faculty
for
September
2010
–
April
2011
Table
FYS‐5.
Summary
of
the
number
of
participants,
participant
type,
and
faculty
of
each
participant
for
the
qualitative
portion
of
this
research
Table
FYS‐6.
Summary
of
the
number
of
participants
and
participant
type
SUMMARY
OF
RESULTS
–Faculty
Survey
Table
SF‐1.
Frequencies
of
biological
gender
of
faculty
respondents
Table
SF‐2.
Frequencies
of
age
categories
of
faculty
respondents
Table
SF‐3.
Frequencies
of
English
as
a
first
language
of
faculty
respondents
Table
SF‐4.
Frequencies
of
country
of
origin
of
faculty
respondents
Table
SF‐5.
Frequencies
of
status
rank
of
faculty
respondents
Table
SF‐6.
Frequencies
of
category
term
of
faculty
respondents
Table
SF‐7.
Frequencies
of
level
of
instruction
of
faculty
respondents
Table
SF‐8.
Frequencies
of
number
of
years
as
professor/instructor
of
faculty
respondents
Table
SF‐9.
Frequencies
of
faculty
department
Table
SF‐10.
Frequencies
of
educational
background
of
faculty
respondents
Table
SF‐11.
Frequencies
of
organized
mentorship
program
participation
of
faculty
respondents
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
5
SUMMARY
OF
RESULTS
–Service
Providers
Survey
Table
SP‐1.
Frequency
of
service
providers’
biological
gender
Table
SP‐2.
Frequency
of
service
providers
by
gender
Table
SP‐3.
Frequency
of
service
providers
self­identifying
English
as
a
first
language
Table
SP‐4.
Frequency
of
service
providers’
country
of
origin
Table
SP‐5.
Frequency
of
service
providers’
employment
status
Table
SP‐6.
Frequency
of
level
of
IS
serviced
as
reported
by
service
providers
Table
SP‐7.
Frequency
of
number
of
years
as
service
providers
at
the
University
of
Windsor
Table
SP‐8.
Frequency
of
service
providers’
educational
background
Table
SP‐9.
Frequency
of
service
providers
reporting
participation
in
organized
mentor
program
LIMITATIONS
Table
L‐1.
Summary
of
each
participant
response
rate
for
the
survey
portion
of
this
study
Table
L‐2.
Number
of
participants
by
focus
group
CONCLUSIONS
Table
C‐1.
Successful
Retention
Strategies
5
LIST
OF
FIGURES
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Figure
ES‐1.
Factors
influencing
IS
perseverance
beyond
first
year
PRE­STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL
SCAN
Figure
PS‐1.
International
students
numbers
compared
to
domestic
students
Figure
PS‐2.
IS
country
of
origin
Figure
PS‐3.
IS
retention
rate
from
first
to
second
year
between
2004­2007
at
the
University
of
Windsor
SUMMARY
OF
RESULTS
–Faculty
Survey
Figure
SF‐1.
Faculty
rating
of
IS
individual
performance
in
course
work
categories
Figure
SF‐2.
Faculty
rating
of
IS
group
performance
in
course
work
categories
Figure
SF‐3.
Faculty
reporting
having
received
training
in
cultural
differences,
cultural
sensitivity,
and
culturally
specific
learning
Figure
SF‐4.
Faculty
reporting
planning
for
cultural
differences,
cultural
sensitivity,
and
culturally
specific
learning
when
designing
course
instruction
Figure
SF‐5.
Faculty
rating
of
the
effect
of
training
in
cultural
differences,
cultural
sensitivity,
and
culturally
specific
learning
on
IS
performance
Figure
SF‐6.
Faculty
rating
of
how
often
they
implement
early
intervention
techniques
to
assist
IS
experiencing
difficulties
in
class
Figure
SF‐7.
Percentage
of
yes
responses
of
faculty
who
identified
that
is
had
reported
experiencing
racism
in
the
Windsor
community,
at
the
University
of
Windsor,
in
classes,
and/or
in
residence
Figure
SF‐8.
Percentage
of
yes
responses
of
faculty
who
identified
that
is
had
reported
experiencing
ethnic
discrimination
in
the
Windsor
community,
at
the
University
of
Windsor,
in
classes,
and/or
in
residence
Figure
SF‐9.
Faculty
observations
of
frequency
of
IS
interactions
with
domestic
students
Figure
SF‐10.
Academic
improvements
from
which
IS
may
benefit
Figure
SF‐11.
Social
and
life
skills
improvements
from
which
IS
may
benefit
Figure
SF‐12.
Faculty
identifying
ways
in
which
faculty
report
inspiring
interaction
between
IS
and
domestic
students
Figure
SF‐13.
Faculty
rating
of
the
culture
of
the
University
of
Windsor
in
recruiting,
accepting,
welcoming,
involving,
and
servicing
IS
Figure
SF‐14.
Faculty
rating
of
the
culture
of
their
faculty/department
in
accepting,
welcoming,
involving,
and
servicing
IS
Figure
SF‐15.
Faculty
rating
of
the
culture
of
their
course
in
accepting,
welcoming,
involving,
and
servicing
IS
Figure
SF‐16.
Faculty
rating
of
overall
experiences
with
IS
in
courses,
in
the
department/faculty,
and
at
the
University
of
Windsor
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
7
SUMMARY
OF
RESULTS
–Service
Providers
Survey
Figure
SP‐1.
Service
providers
reporting
having
received
training
in
cultural
differences,
cultural
sensitivity,
and
culturally
specific
learning
Figure
SP‐2.
Service
providers
reporting
consideration
for
cultural
differences,
cultural
sensitivity,
and
culturally
specific
learning
when
servicing
IS
Figure
SP‐3.
Service
provider
rating
of
how
often
their
office/department
implement
early
intervention
techniques
to
assist
IS
experiencing
difficulties
in
class
Figure
SP‐4.
Percentage
of
yes
responses
of
service
providers
who
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
racism
in
the
Windsor
community,
at
the
University
of
Windsor,
in
classes,
and/or
in
residence
Figure
SP‐5.
Percentage
of
yes
responses
of
service
providers
who
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
ethnic
discrimination
in
the
Windsor
community,
at
the
University
of
Windsor,
in
classes,
and/or
in
residence
Figure
SP‐6.
Academic
improvements
from
which
IS
may
benefit
Figure
SP‐7.
Social
and
life
skills
improvements
from
which
IS
may
benefit
Figure
SP‐8.
Service
provider
rating
of
the
culture
of
the
University
of
Windsor
in
accepting,
welcoming,
involving,
and
providing
services
to
IS
Figure
SP‐9.
Service
provider
rating
of
overall
experiences
with
IS
in
office,
in
the
department/faculty,
and
at
the
University
of
Windsor
7
LIST
OF
ABBREVIATIONS
IS
IF
ISS
International
student
Interviewed
faculty
Interviewed
service
providers
or
support
staff
SS
UW
ISC
Support
staff/Service
providers
The
University
of
Windsor
International
Student
Centre
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
9
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
The
question
of
which
international
students
leave
a
university
and
why
is
a
locally
answered
question
best
examined
and
explored
through
a
recommended
program
of
discovery
combining
interviews
and
focus
group
discussions
for
the
purpose
of
discovering
“university
experiences
of
those
who
leave
their
studies
would
help
institutional
researchers
prioritize
the
various
options
available
to
them
as
they
seek
to
create
more
sophisticated
retention
risk
prediction
data
sets”
(Conrad
&
Morris,
2010).
It
was
determined
during
the
pre‐study
environmental
scan
that
IS
comprise
just
over
10%
of
the
student
population
at
the
University
of
Windsor
since
2006.
The
largest
IS
cohort
is
recruited
from
China,
followed
by
India,
Nigeria,
Pakistan,
and
Bangladesh
in
varied
order
year‐by‐year.
In
recent
years,
the
University
of
Windsor
has
been
working
to
increase
the
retention
rate
of
the
IS
on
campus
through
the
development
and
execution
of
various
supports
and
programs
specifically
intended
to
address
the
needs
and
struggles
of
international
students.
According
to
the
literature
and
pilot
study,
what
helps
international
students
persevere
beyond
the
first
year
is
a
combination
of
dynamic
factors,
such
as
social,
linguistic,
economic,
cultural,
academic,
familial
and
environmental
elements.
The
following
list
summarized
in
Figure
ES‐1
includes
factors
which
a
university
or
institution
has
the
ability
to
influence
as
well
as
factors
outside
of
the
influential
scope
of
the
university.
Figure
ES‐1.
Factors
influencing
IS
perseverance
beyond
first
year
Social
Environ‐
mental
Linguistic
International
Student
Familial
Economic
Academic
Cultural
9
The
preliminary
data
gathered
during
the
course
of
the
pilot
study
indicated
the
following
areas
of
concern
specific
to
the
experiences
of
IS
and
support
staff
at
the
University
of
Windsor:
Table
ES‐1.
Summary
of
themes
emerging
from
pilot
study
Theme
Attendance
Specifics
Prompt
and
regular
attendance
of
orientation(s)
and
classes
Academics
A
combination
of
factors:
disorganized
life‐style,
13‐week
CND
education
system,
large
classes,
poor
time‐management
skills,
parental
pressures,
and
disappointed
program
expectations.
Finances
Financial
pressures
of
failing
a
course
and
limited
financial
resources.
4
Misinformation
Typically
friends
(other
IS)
are
the
first,
though
not
the
best,
source
of
advice
for
concerns
and
issues
encountered.
Racism
&
Racism
and
discrimination
identified
as
a
regular
element
of
IS
daily
lives.
Discrimination
Missed
Connections
Other
Plans
IS
do
not
make
a
connection
to
the
university,
often
remedied
by
becoming
more
involved
in
activities
outside
of
academic
work
IS
do
not
in
the
first
place
intend
to
remain
at
the
university
and
see
UW
as
a
transition
point
to
their
final
University
destination,
typically
universities
in
Toronto
or
the
Greater
Toronto
Area
Cultural
Adjustment
Psychological
Issues
The
most
difficult
to
define
but
the
most
persistent,
including:
communication,
socialization,
friendships,
self‐expression,
and
the
tasks
of
daily
living
Depression,
stress,
anxiety,
loneliness,
academic
and
family
problems,
intimate
relationship
problems.
IS
are
at
an
increased
risk
of
mental
health
issues
in
comparison
to
domestic
students.
In
the
literature
review,
researchers
discovered
that
the
issue
of
international
student
retention
at
the
post‐secondary
level
remains
a
complex
matter
and
is
dependent
on
the
interplay
of
numerous
variables
(Mallinckrodt
&
Sedlacek,
1987).
Without
trivializing
the
issue,
it
can
be
simply
said
that
increased
retention
of
international
students
depends
on
the
culture
of
the
university,
which
must
influence
the
experiences
of
international
students
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
11
at
the
level
of
integration
with
domestic
students,
with
faculty
and
with
the
larger
community.
It
is
the
challenge
of
the
university
to
meet
the
independent
needs
of
both
faculty
and
international
students
and
assist
each
stakeholder
toward
increased
success
and
retention.
Table
ES‐2
summarizes
the
factors
identified
as
influential
to
IS
retention
rates
in
the
literature
review
section
of
this
report:
Table
ES‐2.
Summary
of
factors
identified
in
literature
review
section
deemed
influential
to
IS
retention
rates
Faculty
Voice
Faculty
perceptions
of
IS
academically
detrimental
behaviours:
•
•
•
•
•
Student
Voice
IS
top
reasons
given
for
leaving
a
university:
Not
participating
in
class
Not
asking
for
clarification
Sitting
only
with
international
students
Studying
only
with
international
students
Breach
of
ethical
standards
of
scholarship
Not
making
friends
and
interacting
with
domestic
students
Food
on
campus
International
student
office
Academic
assistance
Cultural
and
social
activities
Housing
Incorrect
information
prior
to
arrival
Availability
of
courses
and
flexibility
in
scheduling
within
degree
plans
Other
reasons
such
as
availability
of
resources
and
research
opportunities
and
social
and
academic
adaptation
within
a
new
environment
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Source:
Adapted
from
Tompson
&
Tompson
(1996)
Source:
Adapted
from
Tas
(2004)
Other
factors
found
to
have
a
strong
influence
on
IS
retention
included
self‐confidence
(Boyer
&
Sedlacek,
1988),
monitoring
(Andrade,
2009),
and
the
availability
of
a
support
group
or
support
person
(Andrade,
2009;
Boyer
&
Sedlacek,
1988).
A
summary
of
results
from
the
full‐year
study
indicate
that
IS
identified
the
following
barriers
to
success
and
retention
at
the
University
of
Windsor:
Culture;
frustration,
disorientation,
and
confusion;
facilities
and
services;
and
racism
and
discrimination.
Table
ES‐3
and
Table
ES‐4
provide
a
summary
of
the
key
findings
or
major
themes
emerging
from
the
full‐year
study
categorized
by
study
participants:
Table
ES‐3.
Summary
of
the
full­year
study
qualitative
emergent
themes
by
participant
•
•
•
•
International
Students
Faculty
Focus
Group
Discussions
Interviews
• Language
• Culture
• Racism
&
discrimination
Culture
Frustration,
disorientation
&
confusion
Facilities
and
services
Racism
and
discrimination
Service
Providers
Interviews
• Language
• Culture
• Racism
&
discrimination
11
Table
ES‐4.
Summary
of
the
full­year
study
survey
emergent
themes
by
participant
Faculty
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Survey
Results
Summary
96%
of
respondents
reported
no
participation
in
an
organized
mentorship
program
Faculty
rated
IS
individual
performance
in
various
aspects
of
course
work
as
satisfactory
while
on
average
IS
group
work
performance
was
rated
as
less
than
satisfactory
Less
than
40%
of
respondents
indicated
receiving
training
in
each
of
cultural
differences
and
cultural
sensitivity
Respondents
indicated
that
they
sometimes
implement
cultural
difference,
cultural
sensitivity
training
when
designing
course
instruction
45%
of
respondents
indicated
that
they
sometimes
implement
early
intervention
techniques
to
assist
an
IS
who
is
experiencing
difficulties
in
class
27%
of
respondents
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
racism
in
the
Windsor
community
&
26%
noted
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
racism
at
UW
More
than
50%
of
respondents
identified
that
IS
reported
ethnic
discrimination
in
the
Windsor
community,
UW,
courses
and
45%
in
residence
Respondents
identified
that
IS
and
domestic
students
in
their
courses
are
more
than
sometimes
observed
to
work
and
study
together,
talk
to
one
another
and
act
friendly
toward
one
another
Respondents
identified
that
they
more
than
sometimes
attempt
to
inspire
interaction
between
IS
and
domestic
students
Respondents
identified
that
more
than
sometimes
IS
may
benefit
from
various
academic,
social
and
life
skills
improvements
Respondents
rated
the
culture
of
UW
at
recruiting,
accepting
and
welcoming
IS
as
satisfactory
but
less
than
satisfactory
at
involving
and
servicing
IS
Service
Providers
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Survey
Results
Summary
65%
of
respondents
reported
no
participation
in
an
organized
mentorship
program
More
than
54%
of
respondents
indicated
receiving
cultural
differences
and/or
cultural
sensitivity
training
Respondents
indicated
that
they
more
than
often
consider
cultural
differences
and/or
cultural
sensitivity
when
servicing
IS
Respondents
indicated
that
their
office/department
more
than
sometimes
implement
early
intervention
techniques
to
assist
IS
experiencing
difficulties
45%
of
respondents
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
racism
in
the
Windsor
community
&
57%
noted
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
racism
at
UW
More
than
50%
of
respondents
identified
that
IS
reported
ethnic
discrimination
in
the
Windsor
community,
UW,
courses
and
75%
in
residence
Respondents
identified
that
more
than
sometimes
IS
may
benefit
from
various
academic,
social
and
life
skills
improvements
Respondents
rated
the
culture
of
UW
at
recruiting,
accepting
and
involving
IS
as
very
good
but
less
than
very
good
at
providing
the
necessary
services
to
IS
Respondents
rated
the
culture
of
their
office
or
department
as
more
than
very
good,
at
accepting,
welcoming
and
involving
IS
and
less
than
very
good
at
providing
the
necessary
services
to
IS
Respondents
rated
their
overall
experiences
with
IS
as
very
good
or
satisfactory
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
13
•
•
•
Respondents
rated
the
culture
of
their
faculty
or
department
as
more
than
satisfactory
at
accepting,
welcoming,
involving
and
servicing
IS
Respondents
rated
the
culture
of
their
course
as
more
than
very
good
at
accepting,
welcoming
and
involving
IS
but
more
less
than
very
good
at
servicing
IS
Respondents
rated
their
overall
experiences
with
IS
as
more
than
satisfactory
In
consensus
with
other
research,
the
results
of
this
study
point
toward
the
idea
that
in
order
for
students
to
be
retained
there
must
be
a
fit
between
student,
institution
and
sociocultural
environment
(Conrad
&
Morris,
2010;
Mallinckrodt
&
Sedlacek,
1987).
In
this
instance,
the
job
of
the
institution
to
meet
varying
needs
of
a
large
number
of
individual
IS
multiplies
the
effort
put
forth
by
the
institution
and
its
representatives.
As
Conrad
and
Morris
(2010)
point
out,
“the
devil
really
is
in
the
details
of
each
student’s
experience”
(p.
13).
Efforts
of
improvement
to
increase
the
retention
rate
should
involve
a
paradigm
shift
in
how
University
administration
conceptualizes
the
efforts
exerted
in
the
work
to
retain
each
international
student.
Conceptually,
administrators
should
focus
their
thinking
away
from
retention
rate
and
toward
retention
risk
factors
(Conrad
&
Morris,
2010).
In
other
words,
the
institutional
view
would
ideally
shift
toward
early
prevention
and
effort
to
assist
the
international
student
in
real
time
as
the
challenge(s)
to
remain
at
the
institution
occurs.
13
PRE­STUDY
ENVIRONMENTAL
SCAN
At
the
University
of
Windsor,
in
2009,
international
students
(IS)
represented
over
11%
of
the
full
and
part‐time,
graduate
and
undergraduate
student
population.
Similarly,
in
2006
international
students
represented
just
over
10%
of
the
entire
student
population,
12%
in
2007,
and
just
over
10%
in
2008
(Figure
PS‐1).
Figure
PS‐1.
International
students
numbers
compared
to
domestic
students
Although
the
University
of
Windsor’s
(UW)
international
students
represent
a
variety
of
countries
from
around
the
world,
the
top
five
largest
populations1
are
recruited
from
India,
Nigeria,
Pakistan
and
Bangladesh,
Pakistan,
Nigeria,
India
and
China.
In
the
last
four
years,
full
and
part
time
graduate
and
undergraduate
IS
from
China
have
represented
the
largest
group
of
international
students
at
UW;
larger
in
number
than
students
from
India,
and
more
than
Nigeria,
Pakistan
and
Bangladesh
combined
(Figure
PS‐
2).
Since
2004,
UW
has
improved
the
ability
to
retain
IS
from
the
first
to
the
second
undergraduate
year.
Figure
PS‐3
represents
the
retention
rate,
in
percentage,
of
the
entering
IS
cohort
of
international
students2
from
first
to
second
year.
1
U.S.
students
were
intentionally
excluded
from
this
study
as
the
education
system
was
deemed
similar,
though
not
identical,
in
comparison.
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
15
Figure
PS‐2.
IS
country
of
origin
CHINA
INDIA
2009
2008
2007
2006
NIGERIA
PAKISTAN
BANGLADESH
0
200
400
600
Between
the
2004
and
2005
academic
year
the
IS
retention
rate
at
UW
was
69.8
percent.
Over
the
next
three
years,
IS
retention
would
steadily
increase
to
70.7%
in
2005,
72.5%
in
2006,
and
74.7%
in
2007.
This
represents
an
upward
slope
and
suggests
that
UW
is
improving
in
the
retention
of
IS
(Figure
PS‐3).
Figure
PS‐3.
IS
retention
rate
from
first
to
second
year
between
2004­2007
at
UW
76.0%
74.7%
74.0%
72.0%
70.0%
72.5%
69.8%
70.7%
68.0%
66.0%
2004
2005
2006
2007
Although
not
exhaustive,
the
following
list
represents
some
of
the
programs
and
services
available
to
IS
attending
UW.
Programs
and
opportunities
are
varied
and
multiple,
from
joining
clubs
and
social
activities
to
assistance
with
locating
job
opportunities
or
financial
assistance
programs
(Table
PS‐1):
2
This
number
includes
IS
who
arrive
to
UW
as
VISA
status
from
Ontario
high
school
and
students
counted
in
the
other
category.
15
Table
PS‐1.
List
of
some
programs
and
services
available
to
IS
at
the
University
of
Windsor
International
Outreach
Office
International
Student
Centre
International
Student
Society
The
Buddy
Program
W.I.E.S.E.L.
V.I.S.A.
W.I.S.E.
International
Student
Handbook
Your
First
Days
In
Ontario:
A
Newcomers
Guide
International
Student
Centre
E.L.I.P.
Transition
Resource
Guide/Booklet
International
Student
Orientation
International
Student
Society
English
Conversation
Groups
iPASS
International
Wednesdays
International
Student
Advisor
International
Speakers
Program
Soft
Landing
Program
Host
for
the
Holidays
For
example,
the
Soft
Landing
Program
arranges
first
night
accommodation
for
new
IS
as
well
as
pick
up
from
the
Windsor
Airport,
VIA
Rail,
Greyhound
or
Robert
Q
station.
V.I.S.A.
or
Volunteer
International
Students’
Assistance
organizes
weekly
or
by‐weekly
social
events.
The
International
Student
Society
also
known
as
ISS
is
a
student
government
body
within
the
University
that
represents
international
student
views
and
needs
on
campus
to
the
University
of
Windsor
Student
Alliance
and
to
University
administration
at
large.
IPAS
or
International
Passport
for
Academic
and
Social
Success
organizes
a
series
of
workshops
tailored
to
the
needs
and
common
pitfalls
of
IS.
These
workshops
are
offered
throughout
the
academic
year
and
speak
on
commonly
inquired
about
issues
such
as
academics,
taxes,
employment,
immigration,
healthy
lifestyle
and
other
issues
of
concern
to
IS.
The
Windsor
International
Student
Employment
program,
also
known
as
W.I.S.E.,
provides
part‐time
employment
opportunities
on
campus
for
international
students.
Various
handbooks
and
guides,
such
as
the
International
Student’s
Handbook,
created
and
distributed
to
all
incoming
IS
by
the
International
Student
Centre,
and
Your
First
Days
in
Ontario
and
Transitions
Resource
Guide,
published
by
the
Ontario
government
but
available
to
students
at
the
International
Student
Centre,
list
resources
and
general
information
for
international
students
and
newcomers
transitioning
into
an
unfamiliar
culture.
Zhang
and
Zhou’s
(2010)
study
of
Chinese
international
students
at
the
University
of
Windsor
sheds
further
light
on
the
issue
of
IS
retention
at
this
institution.
Combining
interviews,
focus
groups
and
survey
data,
Zhang
and
Zhou
(2010)
found
that:
Among
the
array
of
factors
that
are
relevant
to
Chinese
international
students’
studying
and
living
experiences
at
the
University
of
Windsor,
this
study
indicated
that
cultural
shock
was
the
most
important
one.
The
cultural
differences
set
up
barriers
for
their
willingness
and
attempts
to
make
friends
with
native
English
speaking
friends,
share
residences
with
them
and
become
fully
involved
in
group
work.
Although
language
proficiency
was
mentioned
by
many
participants
as
one
factor
that
influenced
their
full
engagement
in
the
academic
and
social
life
on
and
off
campus,
it
was
often
cultural
differences
that
thwarted
their
efforts
to
be
a
part
of
the
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
17
large
community.
For
these
participants
who
were
able
to
manage
the
culture
differences
and
enjoyed
friendships
with
native
English
speakers,
they
felt
significantly
more
satisfied
with
their
experiences
at
the
university
and
more
confidence
with
their
ability
to
finish
their
programmes.
(p.
131‐2)
17
PILOT
STUDY
PURPOSE,
PROCESS,
METHODOLOGY
The
pilot
study
portion
of
this
project
involved
an
initial
process
of
discovery
and
exploration
of
the
issues.
The
intention
of
the
pilot
study
was
to
direct
and
guide
the
yearlong
research
project
beginning
in
September
2010
and
ending
April
2011.
The
pilot
interviews
centred
around
two
guiding
questions:
1. How
do
you
interact
with
international
students?
2. What
are
some
of
the
concerns
and
issues
international
students
typically
come
to
you
with
for
assistance?
In
August
2010,
8
service
providers
directly
involved
with
various
programs
and
support
services
for
international
students
were
interviewed.
Those
selected
were
individuals
who
interact
with
international
students
on
a
daily
basis
and
who
would
be
willing
and
able
to
speak
from
personal
experiences.
The
interviews
lasted
between
40
minutes
to
70
minutes
from
shortest
to
longest.
Interviews
were
conducted
with
representatives
from
the
International
Student
Centre,
International
Student
Admissions,
the
Department
of
Mathematics,
and
Psychological
Services.
Researchers
also
met
with
a
group
of
15
energetic,
quiet,
and
frank
international
students
involved
with
V.I.S.A.
(Volunteers
International
Student
Association).
The
students
were
from
diverse
cultural
backgrounds,
in
various
program
levels
and
had
spent
anywhere
from
1
month
to
a
number
of
years
in
Canada.
The
focus
group
discussion
with
these
students
lasted
70
minutes
and
centred
on
their
experiences
as
international
students
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
Data
was
collected
for
major
themes
emerging
from
the
interviews.
These
themes
are
represented
in
the
following
section.
INSIGHTS
The
preliminary
data
gathered
provided
insights
into
the
experiences
of
students
and
those
working
to
create
a
supportive
learning
culture
for
international
students.
It
gives
an
initial
sense
of
where
and
how
some
of
the
UW
resources
for
IS
are
working
well.
The
pilot
study
also
indicated
areas
where
IS
seem
to
be
looking
for
something
more
or
different
as
well
as
areas
service
providers
indicated
that
that
they
do
not
have
the
reach
they
would
like
to
have
in
helping
IS
succeed
and
continue
their
studies
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
Attendance
An
area
of
concern
identified
in
the
service
providers’
(SS)
interviews
was
IS
attendance
of
orientation.
In
some
instances,
SS
report
that
IS
arrive
late
for
the
Initial
Orientation
Session
and
miss
pertinent
information.
Sometimes,
missing
beginning
classes
means
that
the
opportunity
to
add/drop
a
course
passes
quickly
for
students
who
arrive
late.
Also,
the
issue
of
student
attendance
to
not
just
the
first
but
the
second
orientation
session
meant
to
capture
IS
who
have
arrived
late
to
the
program
was
brought
up.
IS
themselves
indicated
that
the
first
week
of
school
is
“very
important;”
as
is
attending
the
orientation
events.
They
recognized
the
value
of
these
activities
as
two
fold:
receiving
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
19
correct
information
regarding
programs,
services,
and
options
as
well
as
meeting
people
and
making
friends.
One
thing
that
is
working
very
well
is
the
close
monitoring
of
attendance
in
the
English
Language
Improvement
Program
(ELIP).
If
and
when
student
attendance
begins
to
slide,
they
are
required
to
have
a
meeting
with
an
ELIP
administrator
in
order
to
discuss
the
reasons
for
missed
attendance.
The
close
monitoring
of
attendance
work
is
an
early
intervention
program
that
helps
to
identify
issues
as
they
are
happening
in
the
IS’s
life
and
allows
service
providers
to
step
in,
refer,
and
assist
in
the
early
stages.
Academics
Interviewed
SS
identified
issues
directly
affecting
the
academic
success
of
IS.
SS
noted
that
many
IS
lead
disorganized
life‐styles:
staying
up
late
talking
to
family
and
friends
back
home,
allocating
enormous
amounts
of
time
for
friends
and
socializing,
partying
a
lot,
and
so
on.
SS
indicated
that
in
addition
to
less
time
spent
on
studying,
the
poor
time‐
management
indicates
these
IS
may
not
be
practicing
their
English
skills
as
much
as
they
should.
IS,
however,
pointed
out
that
large
classes
as
well
as
a
limited
number
of
Canadian
friends
limited
the
opportunities
to
practice
English
language
required
for
academic
success.
The
Canadian
post‐secondary
education
system
is
based
on
a
13‐week
semester,
which
is
different
from
countries
following
a
full
year
program.
SS
reported
that
some
IS
may
have
a
difficult
time
adjusting
to
the
pace
of
education
in
Canada
and
may
inadvertently
miscalculate
the
amount
of
time
they
have
to
allocate
to
study,
catch
up
with
their
work,
and
to
socialize.
Some
SS
noted
that
some
IS
may
not
be
properly
prepared
for
University
level
English
and
Math
courses
before
arrival.
Some
SS
reported
that
IS
may
be
experiencing
pressures
from
family
to
attend
Engineering
and
Science,
which
require
math
proficiency
and
Business
that
emphasizes
English
skills.
In
fact,
one
SS
estimated
that
about
50%
of
IS
academic
advising
addresses
information
about
other
programs
at
UW.
Similarly,
another
SS
acknowledged
that
some
of
his
students
have
shared
with
him
the
pressures
from
home
to
be
in
a
specific
program
although
the
student
may
want
to
study
something
else.
The
V.I.S.A.
students’
focus
group
attributed
academic
difficulties
to
the
numerous
adjustments
they
need
to
make
once
they
arrive
at
the
University.
Some
indicated
that
their
expectations
for
the
program
they
registered
in
before
arrival
were
not
met
once
they
got
here.
Overall,
however,
IS
involved
in
the
focus
group
discussion
attributed
their
decision
to
leave
the
University
would
be
influenced
by:
racism
and
discrimination;
their
academic
success
or
failure;
cultural
adjustments;
or
family
pressures
and
influences.
Finances
SS
pointed
out
that
some
IS
stick
with
a
course
they
are
not
doing
well
in
because
of
financial
repercussions
of
maintaining
a
certain
percentage
course
load,
which
makes
it
difficult
to
drop
a
course.
Also,
finances
played
a
part
in
ISs’
decisions
to
repeat
a
course,
19
particularly
in
disciplines
where
a
program
is
tightly
structured
‐‐such
as
the
Engineering
program‐‐
and
where
it
may
be
difficult
to
retake
a
course
in
a
timely
manner.
IS
spoke
about
the
financial
pressures
associated
with
failing
a
course
or
a
semester.
Some
IS
indicated
that
their
family
had
limited
financial
resources
and
that
failing
a
course
would
be
more
than
just
a
financial
disappointment
for
them.
Misinformation
Both
SS
and
IS
described
friends
and
friendships
as
very
important
to
IS,
who
in
the
absence
of
their
families
seek
peer
support
from
second,
third,
or
fourth
year
IS
of
a
similar
cultures
and/or
backgrounds.
Interviewed
SS
reported
that
IS
typically
approach
their
friends
as
the
first
line
of
advice
with
problems,
whether
academic
or
otherwise.
However,
no
matter
the
good
intentions
behind
the
advice
of
friends,
sometimes
wrong
advice
or
misinformation
can
be
passed
along
in
the
process
which
may
lead
to
missed
deadlines
or
otherwise
neglecting
issues
that
could
have
been
speedily
handled.
Some
IS
on
the
other
hand,
indicated
that
some
faculty
academic
advisors
did
not
have
correct
or
accurate
information
or
advice
and
that
“they
don’t
know
what
they
are
supposed
to
know”
regarding
the
particular
situation
of
international
students.
Racism
and
Discrimination
Both
IS
and
SS
identified
discrimination
as
a
regular
element
of
international
students’
daily
lives.
Prejudice
takes
many
forms
and
while
the
discrimination
students
experience
at
the
university
and
in
the
local
community
may
not
be
the
formalized
segregation
or
dramatic
civil
right
abuses
familiar
to
us
from
the
press,
from
historic
accounts
or
other
sources,
these
daily
experiences
of
exclusion
and
marginalization
can
form
an
invisible
banner
to
learning,
perseverance,
and
success.
If
integration
is
the
goal,
what
barriers
must
be
addressed?
For
example,
both
IS
and
some
service
providers
indicated
that
sometimes
individuals
in
certain
offices
give
the
impression
that
IS
are:
more
difficult
to
deal
with
than
Canadian
students;
not
good
enough
to
be
here;
and,
are
taking
jobs
from
Windsor
locals
and/or
other
Canadians.
IS
also
reported
that
they
had
experienced
racism
and
discrimination
by
faculty
members.
IS
also
reported
racism
in
the
greater
Windsor
community.
Missed
Connections
Both
IS
and
SS
indicated
that
missed
connections
were
also
a
concern.
It
may
happen
that
sometimes
some
IS
do
not
make
a
connection
with
the
university,
the
people,
or
the
classes
they
attend.
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
21
SS
indicated
that
students
who
get
involved
through
volunteering,
jobs,
clubs,
friends,
and
social
events,
are
more
likely
to
stay
on
at
the
University
of
Windsor
because
they
are
making
connections
with
the
community
and
building
a
life
here.
IS
who
participated
in
the
V.I.S.A.
focus
group
discussion,
identified
the
importance
of
attending
the
first
week
of
orientation
and
meeting
the
“right”
people,
which
they
unanimously
defined
as
the
individuals
who
help
IS
to
feel
“safe”
instead
of
isolated
and
alone.
There
was
some
disagreement
among
the
IS
at
the
V.I.S.A.
meeting
regarding
availability
of
opportunity
to
make
friends
at
UW.
Some
V.I.S.A.
students
indicated
that
there
are
numerous
opportunities
at
UW
to
make
friends,
opportunities
such
as
orientation
and
social
activities
throughout
the
year.
Other
V.I.S.A.
students
reported
it
can
sometimes
be
“difficult
to
make
Canadian
friends”
because
of
an
invisible
barrier
of
language,
culture
and
different
shared
and
lived
experiences
that
sometimes
make
it
more
difficult
to
make
a
connection
across
cultural
differences.
Other
Plans
Some
SS
suggested
that
some
IS
who
come
to
the
University
of
Windsor
seem
to
have
other
plans,
do
not
intend
in
the
first
place
to
remain
at
the
University,
and
see
UW
as
a
transition
to
a
final
destination.
Often,
IS
may
have
family
or
friends
living
in
or
around
Toronto
and
pressures
from
back
home
to
move
closer
to
family
may
be
a
reason
why
some
IS
leave
UW.
Unlike
the
United
States
where
IS
study
visas
are
tied
to
a
specific
institution,
Canada’s
IS
visa
is
nation‐wide
and
once
here,
allows
IS
freedom
of
movement
from
one
institution
to
another.
Finally,
SS
noted
that
this
group
of
students
rarely
approaches
the
university
for
help
with
a
transfer
process
and
cannot
be
easily
reached
until
the
transfer
has
already
occurred.
IS
indicated
that
their
frustration
with
and
disappointment
in
a
program
of
study
may
lead
them
to
make
other
plans
and
consider
other
institutions
within
Canada.
Some
IS
indicated
that
UW
and
the
city
of
Windsor
were
not
accurately
portrayed
in
the
recruitment
literature
and
photographs,
which
ultimately
lead
to
their
disappointment
and
frustration.
Cultural
Adjustment
Cultural
adjustment
is
perhaps
the
most
difficult
issue
to
define
and
the
most
persistent.
It
affects
all
aspects
of
an
IS’s
life:
food,
communication,
socialization,
friendships,
self‐
expression,
and
tasks
of
daily
living,
to
name
a
few.
Both
IS
and
SS
agreed
that
adjusting
to
a
new
culture
is
difficult
and
that
these
pressures
are
compounded
by
adjustments
to
new
academic
pressures
in
the
first
semester
of
a
new
education
system
as
well
as
the
issues
pertaining
to
normal
adolescent
development.
21
Even
socially
involved
V.I.S.A.
students,
reported
both
that
they
feel
home‐sick
and
a
need
and
wish
to
be
surrounded
by
familiar
things
and
people.
Psychological
Issues
SS
noted
IS
mental
health
issues
such
as
depression,
stress,
anxiety,
loneliness,
academic
and
family
problems,
and
relationship
problems.
SS
indicated
that
pressures
felt
by
international
IS
are
also
felt
by
domestic
students,
but
that
these
feelings
are
exaggerated
in
IS
and
this
may
put
some
international
students
at
a
greater
risk
for
experiencing
mental
health
issues.
In
fact,
SS
indicated
that
just
being
an
IS
means
you
are
already
in
a
greater
risk
for
mental
health
issues
than
the
average
domestic
student.
Service
providers
also
noted
that
mental
health
issues
may
be
considered
taboo
in
the
IS’s
home
culture
and
as
such
may
be
difficult
to
bring
up
and
discuss
openly.
Additionally,
pressures
to
do
well,
to
be
in
a
certain
program
despite
personal
interests,
tragic
events
such
as
a
death
in
the
family
back
home
or
natural
disasters,
all
add
to
the
stress
felt
by
some
IS
and
may
in
some
instances
exacerbate
a
mental
health
issue
that
would
not
have
necessarily
manifested
had
it
not
been
for
the
additional
pressures.
SUMMARY
The
retention
of
international
students
depends
on
a
variety
of
factors.
International
students’
coping
abilities
are
not
all
created
equal
and
adjustment
to
a
new
culture
and
a
new
life
is
handled
differently
by
each
personality.
In
light
of
the
information
gathered
so
far,
what
could
be
done
to
increase
the
retention
of
IS
at
the
University
of
Windsor?
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
23
LITERATURE
REVIEW
Rising
Numbers
The
number
of
international
students
at
some
post‐secondary
institutions
continues
to
rise
each
year
(Hansen,
1993;
Rice
et.
all,
2009;
Simpson,
2009,
Tompson
&
Tompson,
2009;
Zhang
&
Zhou,
2010)
with
the
largest
number
attending
American
institutions
(Rice
et.
all,
2009).
Simpson
(2009)
reports
that
between
1999
and
2004
the
number
of
international
students
enrolled
in
New
Zealand
educational
institutions
rose
by
409%,
making
international
education
New
Zealand’s
fourth
largest
export
income
earner.
The
recruitment
of
international
students
has
become
a
priority
for
a
large
number
of
institutions
and
governments
(Cubillo,
Sanchez
&
Cervino,
2006)
that
see
a
benefit
to
attracting
this
population
of
learners
to
a
campus.
However,
as
Tompson
and
Tompson
(1996)
point
out,
“enrollment
does
not
guarantee
their
graduation”
(¶
4)
and
increased
numbers
of
international
students
on
campuses
present
new
challenges
for
the
institution
and
its
representatives
(Barron,
Gourlay
&
Gannon‐Leary,
2010).
Benefits
of
International
Students
on
Campus
The
presence
of
international
students
at
a
post‐secondary
institution
adds
to
the
multiculturalism
and
diversity
of
the
general
student
population
and
reinforces
a
global
perspective
and
exchange
of
ideas
at
a
university
(Rice
et.
all,
2009;
Tas,
2004;
Tompson
&
Timpson,
1996;
Van
Nelson,
Nelson,
Malone
2004).
Mutually,
international
and
domestic
students
develop
global
cultural
skills
necessary
for
success
in
an
increasingly
global
environment
(Carter
&
Xu,
2007;
Cubillo,
Sanchez
&
Cervino,
2006)
and
diverse
workforce.
In
addition,
the
retention
of
international
students
represents
a
cost
benefit
for
the
institution
(Andrade,
2009;
Simpson,
2009;
Tompson
&
Tompson
1996;
Van
Nelson,
Nelson,
Malone
2004)
and
the
destination
country
as
a
whole
(Simpson,
2009).
Rice
et.
al.
(2009)
report
that
according
to
the
Institute
of
International
Education
“international
students
and
their
families
brought
$14.5
billion
to
the
U.S.
economy
in
2006‐2007”
(p.
376).
In
this
environment,
the
recruitment
and
retention
of
international
students
has
become
a
priority
for
some
institutions
(Cubillo,
Sanchez
&
Cervino,
2006;
Tompson
&
Tompson,
1996).
Institutional
Challenges
In
addition
to
the
benefits,
the
presence
of
international
students
at
post‐secondary
institutions
presents
challenges
(Barron,
Gourlay,
&
Gannon‐Leary,
2010;
Carter
&
Xu,
2007;
Hansen,
1993;Rice
et.
all,
2009).
Academically,
this
portion
of
an
institution’s
student
population
experiences,
among
other
things,
language
difficulties
(Barron,
Gourlay,
&
Gannon‐Leary,
2010;
Carter
&
Xu,
2007;
Fitzgerald,
1998;
Hansen,
1993;
Tas,
2004;
Zhang
&
Zhou,
2010),
culture
related
learning
differences
(Carter
&
Xu,
2007
Rice
et.
all,
2009;
Tas,
2004;
Tompson
&
Tompson,
1996),
and
academic
support
issues
(Fitzgerald,
1998;
Sandeen,
2004;
Tas,
2004).
Equally
important
to
the
retention
puzzle
are
non‐academic
challenges
international
students
face
while
enrolled
in
post‐secondary
institutions.
These
challenges
include
but
23
are
not
limited
to:
cultural
differences
(Carter
&
Xu,
2007;
Fitzgerald,
1998;
Hansen,
1993;
Tas,
2004;
Zhang
&
Zhou,
2010);
isolation
(Carter
&
Xu,
2007;
Hansen,
1993;
Van
Nelson,
Nelson
&
Malone,
2004);
relating
to
and
identifying
with
campus
community
(Carter
&
Xu,
2007;
Hansen,
1993);
social
issues
(Fitzgerald,
1998;
Mallinckrodt
&
Sedlacek,
1987;
Rice
et.
all,
2009;
Tas,
2004;
Van
Nelson,
Nelson
&
Malone,
2004;
Zhang
&
Zhou,
2010);
and
finances
(Beane,
1985;
Fitzgerald,
1998;
Tas,
2004;
Van
Nelson,
Nelson
&
Malone,
2004).
The
International
Student
Voice
A
2004
study
that
surveyed
43
international
students
at
the
University
of
the
Incarnate
Word
in
San
Antonio,
Texas,
outlined
that
international
students
reported
experiencing
difficulties
and
challenges
with:
social
adaptation;
college
services;
finances;
cultural
and
social
activities;
student
government
and
voice
at
the
university;
health
care
and
wellness
services;
the
orientation
process;
dorms;
university
value
system;
various
university
offices;
dealing
with
authority
and
bureaucracy;
receiving
accurate
information
before
arrival;
being
understood;
and
the
geographical
location
of
the
university.
Through
six
individual
interviews
randomly
selected
from
the
survey
respondents
Tas
(2004)
identified
nine
reasons
students
gave
for
leaving
the
university
(Table
LR‐1):
Table
LR‐1.
Summary
of
Tas’s
(2004)
nine
reasons
IS
gave
for
leaving
a
university
Theme
Making
friends
and
interacting
with
domestic
students
Food
on
campus
International
student
office
Academic
assistance
Cultural
and
social
activities
Housing
Incorrect
information
prior
to
arrival
Specifics
language
barriers;
difficulty
making
domestic
friends;
felt
discriminated
against
by
domestic
students;
made
friends
mostly
with
other
international
students;
more
difficult
in
this
environment
to
belong
more
expensive,
less
diverse,
not
as
tasty
as
off
campus;
lack
of
sensitivity
to
religious
restrictions
and
traditions,
mandatory
meal
card
plan
lack
of
assistance;
feelings
of
discrimination
lack
of
dedicated
and
approachable
advisors
and
admin
staff;
can't
find
advisors
b/c
they're
not
around;
international
students
need
more
assistance
b/c
they
are
making
a
greater
adjustment
than
domestic
students
inadequate
network
indicated;
isolated;
lacking
social
support
compared
to
home
country
too
many
restrictions;
frequent
and
short
notice
relocations
lack
of
trust
in
recruitment
and
orientation
process
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
25
Availability
of
courses
and
flexibility
in
scheduling
within
degree
plans
Other
reasons
courses
not
available;
little
or
no
flexibility
in
scheduling
process
social
and
academic
adaptation
within
a
new
environment;
availability
of
resources
and
research
opportunities
Source:
Adapted
from
Tas
(2004).
The
Faculty
Voice
The
faculty
perspective
gives
a
different
view
of
the
issues
and
challenges
international
students
face
at
a
post‐secondary
institution.
Carter
and
Xu
(2007)
describe
nursing
faculty
perceptions
of
program
adequacy
related
to
culture
differences
and
identify
language
as
a
significant
barrier
to
ESL
students’
progression,
testing,
learning
style
and
communication.
The
challenges
ESL
students
face
may
be
related
to
patient
safety,
time
demands
required
for
the
instruction
of
ESL
students,
and
various
psychosocial
issues
such
as
the
ability
to
form
relationships
with
peer
groups,
isolation,
loneliness
and
poor
social
supports
(Carter
&
Xu,
2007).
Furthermore,
Carter
and
Xu
(2007)
noted
that
faculty
expressed
frustration
that
due
to
employment
restrictions
and
the
subsequent
inability
to
earn
an
income
as
a
student
meant
that
international
students
could
not
resource
a
tutor
to
assist
them
in
academic
difficulties.
Similarly,
Carter
and
Xu
(2007)
identify
three
program
inadequacies
communicated
by
community
advisors:
language
and
communication
barriers;
clinical
probation
due
to
communication
difficulties
as
unnecessary
humiliation;
and
competing
for
attention
and
time
of
faculty
with
other
students.
Using
e‐mail
surveys
targeting
two
universities
in
the
southeastern
United
States,
Tompson
and
Tompson
(1996)
asked
business
school
faculty
to
identify
behaviors
exhibited
by
international
students
they
consider
academically
detrimental.
Similarly,
international
students
were
asked
to
identify
adjustment
areas
they
perceived
as
most
difficult
(Tompson
&
Tompson,
1996).
The
results
are
summarized
in
Table
2.
Table
LR‐2.
Faculty
perceptions
of
IS’
academically
detrimental
behaviors
and
IS’
perceptions
of
most
difficult
adjustment
areas
Faculty
1.
Not
participating
in
class
(77%
of
the
surveyed
faculty)
2.
Not
asking
for
clarification
(69%
of
the
surveyed
faculty)
3.
Sitting
only
with
international
students
(66%
of
the
surveyed
faculty)
4.
Studying
only
with
international
students
(58%
of
the
surveyed
faculty)
Students
1.
Social
isolation
2.
Language
skills
3.
Knowing
norms,
rules,
and
regulations
4.
Overcoming
stereotypes
5.
Transportation
6.
Clothing
norms
25
5.
Breach
of
ethical
standards
of
scholarship
(24%
of
the
surveyed
faculty)
7.
Weather
differences
8.
Food
differences
9.
Oral
presentation
assignments
10.
Personal
finances
Source:
Adapted
from
Tompson
&
Tompson
(1996).
Generally
speaking,
a
comparison
of
the
overall
themes
identified
by
faculty
and
students
in
Table
2
above
indicate
imbrications
of
themes.
Interestingly,
international
students
ranked
language
second
to
social
isolation
as
the
most
difficult
adjustment
areas.
Variables
for
Academic
Success
Broadly
speaking,
numerous
cognitive
and
non‐cognitive
variables
have
been
identified
as
impacting
the
academic
success
and
retention
of
international
students
or
students
from
non‐dominant
cultures
and
disadvantaged
backgrounds:
faculty
interaction,
community
participation,
peer
group
interaction,
involvement
in
formal
organizations,
campus
climate,
validating
experiences,
mentoring,
academic
performance,
intellectual
development,
valuing
diversity,
accepting
others,
self‐esteem,
self‐efficacy
(Andrade,
2009),
adjustment
to
a
new
educational
system,
and
cultural
adaptation
among
others
(Boyer
&
Sedlacek,
1988).
Yet
despite
the
increased
focus
on
variables
linked
to
academic
success
and
retention
of
this
segment
of
the
post‐secondary
student
population,
retention
rates
have
not
seen
a
real
improvement
in
the
last
23
years
(Andrade,
2009).
What
has
come
out
of
the
literature
is
that
programs
targeting
retention
rates
must
be
suited
and
tailored
to
individual
institutions
(Andrade,
2009).
TOEFL
Introduced
in
1964
(Wait
&
Grussel,
2009),
the
Test
of
English
as
a
Foreign
Language
(TOEFL)
is
widely
used
is
North
America
as
a
measurement
of
English
proficiency.
It
is
also
used
by
post
secondary
institutions
in
admitting
and
predicting
the
success
of
international
students
across
a
variety
of
backgrounds
and
disciplines
(Beane,
1985;
Van
Nelson,
Nelson,
&
Malone,
2004;
Wait
&
Grussel,
2009).
The
use
of
TOEFL
as
an
English
proficiency
measurement
depends
partially
on
its
appearance
as
a
standardized
measurement;
each
year,
700,000
people
write
the
TOEFL
test
at
approximately
1500
test‐centers
worldwide
(Wait
&
Gressel,
2009).
TOEFL
claims
to
measure
English
proficiency,
which
is
fundamental
to
the
academic
success
of
international
students
(Beane,
1985;
Carter
&
Xu,
2007;
Van
Nelson,
Nelson,
&
Malone,
2004).
However,
the
ability
of
TOEFL
to
predict
academic
success
of
international
students
has
been
and
is
being
disputed
(Beane,
1985;
Tompson
&
Tompson,
1996;
Van
Nelson,
Nelson,
&
Malone,
2004;
Wait
&
Grussel,
2009).
Researchers
have
argued
that
English
proficiency
measured
by
TOEFL
is
inadequate
tool
to
predict
academic
success
(Beane,
1985;
Van
Nelson,
Nelson
&
Malone,
2004)
and
that
language
proficiency
is
difficult
to
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
27
measure
because
communication
depends
on
“grammatical
competence,
sociolinguistic
competence,
discoursed
competence…
[and]
the
verbal
and
nonverbal
dimensions
of
a
language”
(Van
Nelson,
Nelson,
&
Malone,
2004,
p.
20).
Moreover,
a
proficiency
in
English
is
seen
as
one
of
the
numerous
factors
contributing
to
the
academic
success
of
international
students
(Beane,
1985;
Carter
&
Xu,
2007;
Van
Nelson,
Nelson,
&
Malone,
2004).
In
a
study
of
the
relationship
between
TOEFL
score
and
academic
success
for
international
students,
Wait
and
Grussel
(2009)
report
that
academic
success
for
students
may
“depend
partly
on
inherent
differences
between
students
who
enroll
in
engineering
majors
and
students
in
other
majors…
on
the
courses
themselves,
and
corresponding
variations
in
the
degree
to
which
English
language
abilities
are
required
for
academic
success
in
these
courses”
(p.
396).
Wait
and
Grussel
(2009)
recommend
using
a
variety
or
range
of
factors
to
assess
the
academic
preparation
and
success
probability
of
international
students
applying
for
post‐secondary
study
in
America
and
conclude
that
the
use
of
a
TOEFL
score
as
a
single
measurement
as
an
academic
performance
predictor
is
“inadvisable”
(p.
396).
Similarly,
Van
Nelson,
Nelson,
and
Malone’s
2004
study
analyzing
the
records3
of
866
international
students
studying
within
American
universities
between
1987‐2002
found
that
the
use
of
“TOEFL
is
not
a
predictor
of
whether
or
not
an
international
student
will
complete
a
master’s
degree…that
the
TOEFL
has
predictive
power
in
determining
GGPA…[and]
when
combined
with
other
factors,
[TOEFL]
may
be
of
use
in
predicting
academic
performance”
(p.
25).
Other
factors
influencing
the
success
of
international
students
in
a
graduate
program
include
“attitude,
independence,
motivation
or
dedication,
isolation
from
other
students,
emotional
difficulties,
dissatisfaction
with
faculty,
health
issues,
and
financial
considerations”
(Van
Nelson,
Nelson,
&
Malone,
2004,
p.
26).
Study
Discipline
Discipline
of
study
or
major
is
also
linked
to
academic
success
of
international
students
(Beane,
1985;
Van
Nelson,
Nelson,
&
Malone,
2004;
Wait
&
Grussel,
2009).
Specifically,
Beane
(1985)
found
that:
retention
of
international
students
is
more
closely
related
to
majors
than
English
proficiency;
that
Engineering
students
had
a
high
retention
percentage
as
a
result
of
a
combination
between
a
high
GPA
and
a
sense
of
identification
among
students
with
that
department
as
a
result
of
being
admitted
into
program
as
freshmen;
and
students
who
entered
post‐secondary
programs
for
which
they
have
experience
at
the
high
school
level.
Finances
Finances
may
also
impact
the
ability
of
international
students
to
do
well
in
post‐
secondary
education
(Beane,
1985;
Boyer
&
Sedlacek,
1988;
Tas,
2004).
Unreliable
financial
support
by
the
country
of
origin
due
to
political
or
economic
instability
as
well
as
the
inability
or
ineptitude
to
budget
appropriately
impact
on
the
financial
situation
of
3
As
a
means
to
determine
the
retention
to
degree
completion,
Nelson,
Nelson
and
Malone
(2004)
analyzed
8
predictor
variables:
TOEFL
cores
(raw
and
composite,
age,
gender,
geographic
categories
of
native
country,
native
language,
academic
area
of
concentration,
graduate,
grade
point
average
in
the
first
nine
hours
of
graduate
study
and
admission
status.
27
international
students
(Beane,
1985).
Beane
(1985)
reports
that
the
State
University
of
New
York
lost
138
international
students
from
a
sample
of
499
over
a
four‐year
period
to
poor
scholarships
and
unpaid
bills.
Similarly,
Tas
(2004)
reports
that
less
than
40%
of
international
students
responding
to
a
survey
identified
finances
as
the
main
factor
for
leaving
the
university.
Cultural
Adjustment
Among
other
variables
impacting
the
academic
success
and
retention
of
international
students,
cultural
adjustment
permeates
and
affects
most
aspects
of
student
life:
living
arrangements,
participating
in
the
community,
socialization,
communication,
eating
practices
and
food
consumption,
learning
styles,
and
education
system
to
name
a
few.
In
this
regard,
cultural
adjustment
is
perhaps
the
most
difficult
issue
to
define
as
well
as
the
most
persistent
because
it
can
affect
all
aspects
of
an
international
student’s
life.
Social
Supports
Although
difficult
to
measure
and
evaluate,
the
availability
of
social
supports
may
impact
on
the
academic
success
and
retention
of
international
students
(Simpson
&
Tan,
2009).
Simpson
and
Tan
(2009)
conclude
“students
may
essentially
be
saying
that
their
relationship
with
their
university
and
its
staff
is
relatively
more
important
than
the
content
of
their
courses
or
the
quality
of
their
degree”
(p.
16).
Of
course,
there
are
significant
implications
here
for
the
type
of
social
support
international
students
find
and
accept
during
their
study
and
adjustment
period.
Social
support
has
been
shown
to
reduce
stress,
promote
positive
health
outcomes
and
moderate
the
effect
of
stress
on
mental
health
symptoms
(Rice
et.
all,
2009).
For
example,
one
study
examining
international
student
perspectives
on
graduate
advising
relationships
with
faculty
members
suggests
that
“international
students
face
a
larger
challenge
in
forging
an
identity
as
a
scholar
as
well
as
forging
an
emotional
bond
with
an
advisor
who
most
likely
is
from
a
different
cultural
group”
(Rice
et.
all,
2009).
The
loss
of
the
advising
relationship
as
a
form
of
social
support
may
result
from
“unvoiced
cultural
differences
in
role
expectations,
interpersonal
styles,
and
social
behaviour”
(Rice
et.
all,
2009).
On
the
other
hand,
international
students
placed
social
isolation
as
the
number
one
most
difficult
adjustment
area
(Tompson
&
Tompson,
1996).
This
may
further
explain,
Tompson
and
Tompson
(1996)
reason
why
international
students
who
form
relationships
with
other
international
students
are
hard‐pressed
or
unwilling
to
socialize
with
American
students.
Another
aspect
of
this
complex
web
of
social
supports
available
to
international
students
studying
within
a
university
setting
is
the
student
affairs
department
(Sandeen,
2004).
Although
known
by
various
names,
a
typical
student
affairs
department
may
support
international
students
in
such
things
as
enrollment
management,
financial
aid,
housing,
counseling,
student
health,
judicial
programs,
career
service,
recreational
sports,
and
student
activities,
all
of
which
contributes
to
the
whole
student
learning
experience
(Sandeen,
2004).
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
29
Finally,
“[s]elf‐confidence
and
availability
of
a
strong
support
person
consistently
predicted
GPA
across
the
eight
semesters
examined”
(p.
220)
in
a
study
by
Boyer
and
Sedlacek
(1988).
Considering
the
numerous
academic
and
social
adjustment
international
students
must
make,
“feeling
confident,
determined,
and
independent,
and
having
another
individual
to
whom
to
turn
in
crisis
were
important
determinants
of
adjustment
to
academic
demands
and
attainment
of
academic
success”
(Boyer
&
Sedlacek,
1988,
p.
220).
Factors
Contributing
to
Retention
Some
studies
have
shown
that
certain
non‐cognitive
variables
contribute
to
the
retention
of
international
students.
For
example,
Boyer
and
Sedlacek
(1988)
found
that
over
the
course
of
eight
semesters,
international
student
attrition
increased
over
time
from
9%
to
39%.
Furthermore,
“[c]ommunity
service
and
understanding
racism
significantly
added
to
the
prediction
of
persistence
for
each
of
the
eight
semesters”
(Boyer
&
Sedlacek,
1989,
p.
219)
while
for
semesters
2
to
5
the
best
predictor
was
involvement
in
community
service.
Meanwhile,
the
greatest
predictors
of
a
cumulative
GPA
for
international
students
across
the
eight
semesters
in
this
study
were
self‐confidence
and
the
availability
of
a
strong
support
person.
Other
non‐cognitive
predictors
of
a
higher
GPA
included
realistic
self‐
appraisal,
understanding
racism,
leadership,
and
preference
for
long‐range
goals
(Boyer
&
Sedlacek,
1988).
Similarly,
Andrade
(2009)
advocates
for
the
importance
of
continually
assessing
and
monitoring
international
students
toward
retention.
In
a
study
intended
to
determine
the
benefits
of
a
first‐year
seminar
beyond
the
first
year,
Andrade
(2009)
reports
largely
positive
findings;
students
appear
to
be
well‐adjusted
in
a
variety
of
different
academic
and
social
areas
thanks
in
good
part
to
the
first
year
seminar
built
to
address
unique
institutional
and
students’
needs.
For
example,
while
students
reported
being
most
comfortable
with
their
international
peers,
they
also
“reported
being
comfortable
within
the
campus
culture
and
appreciating
different
cultural
viewpoints”
(Andrade,
2009,
p.
500).
Students
also
reported
that
their
participation
in
the
first‐year
seminar
“positively
impacted
their
active
learning
behaviors”
(Andrade,
2009,
p.
500)
while
more
could
be
done
to
help
international
students
feel
comfortable
when
interacting
with
Americans
and
with
their
professors
(Andrade,
2009).
Overall,
Andrade
(2009)
found
that
students
tended
to
view
the
seminar
positively
and
felt
that
it
contributed
to
their
campus
experience
in
the
first
year
and
beyond.
Beane
(1985)
discusses
three
models
for
retention
due
to
the
high
variability
among
students
based
on
GPA,
secondary
school
background
compatibility
with
university
major,
and
relationship
between
financial
difficulties,
employment
and
study
time.
Furthermore,
Beane’s
(1985)
findings
suggest
that:
English
competency
prior
to
admission
is
a
critical
factor
in
the
retention
of
international
students;
transfer
students
from
within
the
USA
and
abroad
are
most
likely
to
be
retained;
ability
and
motivation
are
important
factors
for
student
success;
and
that
“Engineering
majors
hold
the
highest
retention
rate
based
possibly
on
departmental
expectations
or
a
strong
identification
with
their
major
field”
(p.
117).
29
Required
Changes
While
the
literature
and
supporting
studies
suggest
that
there
are
many
factors
influencing
international
student
retention,
the
solutions
offered
appear
to
be
both
universally
applicable
and
locally
appropriate.
Studies
suggest
that
possible
solutions
to
increasing
international
student
retention
within
the
influential
reach
of
the
post‐
secondary
institution
include:
• quality
enhancement
interventions
and
non‐cognitive
elements
of
a
student’s
experience
such
as:
day
long
workshops
(Carter
&
Xu,
2007)
and
orientations
which
introduce
international
students
to
the
facilities
and
services
available
to
them
(Mallinckrodt
&
Sedlacek,
1987;
Van
Nelson,
Nelson
&
Malone,
2004);
• providing
individual
counseling
to
meet
needs
of
international
students
(Andrade,
2009;
Boyer
&
Sedlacek,
1988);
• establishing
a
minimum
(English
language
proficiency
and/or
GPA)
entry
criteria
(Beane,
1985;
Carter
&
Xu,
2007);
• establishing
an
exchange
program
(Carter
&
Xu,
2007);
• monitoring
international
students’
progress
through
the
academic
program
and
year(s)
(Andrade,
2009;
Van
Nelson,
Nelson
&
Malone,
2004);
• establishing
a
mentoring
program
for
one‐on‐one
support
(Boyer
&
Sedlacek,
1988;
Carter
&
Xu,
2007);
• developing
culturally
appropriate
approach
to
meet
the
unique
needs
of
ESL
students
within
the
classroom
(Andrade,
2009;
Carter
&
Xu,
2007;
Sandeen,
2009);
• developing
strategies
of
cooperation
and
coordination
among
offices
accessed
by
international
students
(Sandeen,
2004;
Beane,
1985);
• helping
international
students
with
community
involvement
(Boyer
&
Sedlacek,
1988),
interaction
with
faculty
members
(Andrade,
2009)
and
domestic
students
(Andrade,
2009);
• increasing
sensitivity
toward
cultural
differences
within
departments
(Sandeen,
2004;
Beane,
1985);
• helping
international
students
understand
racism
in
the
community
(Boyer
&
Sedlacek,
1988);
and
• providing
international
students
with
pre‐arrival
information
to
decrease
the
first
semester
learning
curve
(Andrade,
2009).
Furthermore,
Beane
(1985)
suggests
international
student
retention
is
a
shared
responsibility
with
students
who
must
research
universities
in
order
to
find
a
best
fit,
must
insure
that
they
grasp
and
understand
English
well
enough
to
attend
and
study
at
the
post‐
secondary
level,
and
must
work
to
develop
a
support
group
in
the
absence
of
their
family
and
friends.
Summary
The
issue
of
international
student
retention
at
the
post‐secondary
level
remains
a
complex
issue
dependent
on
the
interplay
of
numerous
variables
(Mallinckrodt
&
Sedlacek,
1987).
Without
trivializing
the
issue,
it
can
be
simply
said
that
increased
retention
of
international
students
depends
on
the
culture
of
the
university,
which
must
influence
the
experiences
of
international
students
at
the
level
of
integration
with
domestic
students,
with
faculty
and
with
the
larger
community.
Sandeen
(2004)
explains
that
“[i]nternational
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
31
students
represent
a
rich
resource”
(p.
31)
for
a
university
community
and
culture;
a
resource
which
should
be
recognized
and
developed.
However,
as
Nelson,
Nelson
and
Malone
(2004)
point
out,
when
an
international
student
leaves
a
campus
due
to
academic
dismissal
or
otherwise,
“the
loss
is
decidedly
more
than
monetary
for
all
concerned”
(p.
19).
31
FULL­YEAR
STUDY
Purpose
The
purpose
of
this
research
was
to
determine
what
could
be
done
to
positively
affect
international
student
retention
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
The
central
concern
of
this
study
was
to
determine
the
direction
or
future
approach
the
University
of
Windsor
should
take
in
order
to
support
international
students.
The
proposed
research
project
had
two
primary
objectives:
1. To
identify
the
factors
that
contribute
to
attrition
of
international
students
to
determine
what
might
be
done
to
improve
the
success
and
persistence
of
international
students
academically,
through
support
initiatives
and
in
our
student
recruitment
program;
and
2. To
develop
a
predictive
model
to
identify
international
students
who
are
likely
leavers
so
that
limited
resources
could
be
effectively
deployed
to
improve
the
persistence
of
individual
international
students.
The
research
design
included
both
a
full‐year
cohort
follow‐up
qualitative
study
using
both
undergraduate
and
graduate
international
students;
and,
a
two
part
interview
process
and
survey
of
faculty
and
service
providers.
The
collected
data
was
coded
and
analyzed
for
themes,
patterns
of
similarity
and/or
difference.
This
final
report
is
a
synthesis
of
the
above
research
and
analysis.
Recruitment
Participants
in
this
study
were
recruited
from
four
sample
populations
at
the
University
of
Windsor:
international
students;
international
student
groups;
service
providers
to
international
students;
and,
faculty
who
instruct
international
students.
Students
The
full‐year
study
used
both
formal
recruitment
and
participant
observation
to
recruit
participants
for
this
study.
Researchers
recruited
international
students
for
participation
in
one
of
four
focus
groups
discussions
(Table
FYS‐1)
with
the
criteria
outlined
below:
Table
FYS‐1:
Summary
of
IS
focus
group
discussions
participant
criteria
Focus
Group
A
‐6‐8
IS
per
focus
group
‐4
focus
groups
in
total
(November
2010,
December
2010,
January
2011,
March
2011)
‐60‐90
minutes/focus
group
Focus
Group
C
‐6‐8
second
year
graduate
IS
per
focus
group
‐1
focus
group
in
total
(March
2011)
‐60‐90
minutes/focus
group
Focus
Group
B
‐6‐8
second
year
undergraduate
IS
per
focus
group
‐1
focus
group
in
total
‐60‐90
minutes/focus
group
Focus
Group
D
‐6‐8
IS
‐1
focus
group
(March
2011)
‐30‐90
minute/focus
group
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
33
IS
participants
in
the
focus
group
discussion
were
emailed
a
list
of
questions
(Appendix
A)
prior
to
their
participation
in
the
focus
groups
IS
were
asked
to
reflect
on
their
personal
experiences
as
international
students
at
the
University
of
Windsor
in
order
to
help
focus
participant
answers
and
to
add
another
layer
of
informed
consent
between
participants
and
researchers.
Using
an
international
student
email
list,
the
Windsor
International
Student
E‐mail
List
serve,
researchers
sent
a
recruitment
email
(Appendix
B)
to
all
IS
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
This
email
outlined
the
qualifying
criteria,
described
the
research
process,
outlined
the
responsibilities
of
the
participants
and
identified
the
process
of
withdrawing
from
participation
in
the
research.
Researchers
also
recruited
international
students
for
participation
in
this
study
though
a
recruitment
poster
(Appendix
C)
made
available
at
the
International
Student
Centre
where
a
large
number
of
IS
congregate.
The
recruitment
poster
was
also
posted
on
the
international
student
Facebook
page
along
with
an
explanatory
message
from
the
research
team.
Researchers
also
asked
that
faculty
from
engineering
and
business,
which
have
a
large
concentration
of
international
students,
recommend
IS
for
participation
in
Focus
Group
D
discussions.
Researchers
interviewed
representatives
from
the
following
student
bodies
of
government
at
the
University
of
Windsor:
Graduate
Students
Society;
Organization
of
Part‐
Time
University
Students
executive;
and
the
International
Student
Society.
Researchers
sent
a
recruitment
email
to
the
executive
members
that
described
the
research
study,
process
and
outlined
the
responsibilities
of
the
participants
who
volunteer
to
partake
in
the
research
study.
Prior
to
the
interview,
participants
were
emailed
a
list
of
questions
(Appendix
D)
that
would
guide
the
interview.
Service
Providers
and
Faculty
Service
providers
and
faculty
were
recruited
from
the
population
of
service
providers
and
faculty
at
the
University
of
Windsor
in
the
academic
year
2010‐2011.
The
researchers
used
formal
recruitment
to
recruit
participants
for
this
study
from
the
population
of
service
providers
working
at
the
University
of
Windsor
who
provide
services
to
international
students
and
who
work
daily
to
meet
the
needs
of
international
students.
As
part
of
the
formal
recruitment,
researchers
sent
a
recruitment
email
to
all
service
providers
(Appendix
E)
and
faculty
(Appendix
F)
of
international
students
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
The
recruitment
e‐mail
outlined
the
qualifying
criteria,
described
the
research
process,
outlined
the
responsibilities
of
the
participants
and
identified
the
process
of
withdrawing
from
participation
in
the
research.
For
the
service
providers’
interviews,
researchers
recruited
service
providers
from
the
following
offices:
International
Student
Centre;
Centre
for
English
Language
Development;
Psychological
Services;
Program
Advisor
for
International
Students;
Director
of
International
Admissions;
Student
Counseling
Centre;
and,
other
offices.
For
the
faculty
33
interviews,
researchers
recruited
faculty
from
the
following
faculties:
engineering,
science,
business,
arts
and
social
science;
kinesiology,
and
nursing.
Faculty
participants
(Appendix
G)
and
service
provider
participants
(Appendix
H)
were
emailed
a
list
of
questions
prior
to
the
interview.
Researchers
asked
that
participants
reflect
on
their
experiences
with
international
students
at
the
University
of
Windsor
in
order
to
help
focus
participant
answers
and
to
add
another
layer
of
informed
consent
between
participants
and
researchers.
Methodology
The
research
design
consisted
of
a
full‐year
cohort
follow‐up
qualitative
methodology
study
using
both
undergraduate
and
graduate
students;
and
a
two
part
interview
process
and
survey
of
both
faculty
and
service
providers.
Tables
FYS‐2,
Table
FYS‐3,
and
Table
FYS‐
4
below
summarize
the
research
activity
for
international
student,
service
providers,
and
faculty
during
the
course
of
this
study.
Table
FYS‐2:
Summary
of
research
activity
involving
IS
for
September
2010
–
April
2011
September
2010
October
2010
November
2010
December
2010
No
activity
No
Activity
Focus
Group
A
Focus
Group
A
Focus
Group
B
January
2011
February
2011
March
2011
April
2011
Focus
Group
A
Student
Group
Focus
Group
A
Results
to
Interviews
participants
Focus
Group
C
Focus
Group
D
Student
Group
Interviews
Table
FYS‐3:
Summary
of
research
activity
involving
service
providers
for
September
2010
–
April
2011
September
2010
October
2010
November
2010
December
2010
No
activity
No
Activity
Interviews
Interviews
Survey
January
2011
February
2011
March
2011
April
2011
No
activity
Interviews
Interviews
Results
to
participants
Survey
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
35
Table
FYS‐4:
Summary
of
research
activity
involving
faculty
for
September
2010
–
April
2011
September
2010
October
2010
November
2010
December
2010
No
activity
No
Activity
Interviews
Interviews
Survey
January
2011
February
2011
March
2011
April
2011
No
activity
Interviews
Interviews
Results
to
Survey
participants
Participants
The
number
of
participants
in
the
qualitative
portion
of
this
research
study,
as
well
as
their
respective
faculty
and
departments,
are
outlined
in
Table
FYS‐5
below.
Table
FYS‐5:
Summary
of
the
number
of
participants,
participant
type,
and
faculty
of
each
participant
in
the
qualitative
or
interview
portion
of
this
research
#
of
Participants
15
Type
of
Participant
Faculty
(Interview)
12
Service
Providers
(Interview)
3
Student
Group
Representatives
(Interview)
Students
(Focus
Group)
17
Faculty
or
Department
Engineering,
Odette
School
of
Business,
Centre
for
Teaching
and
Learning,
Computer
Science,
Education,
Canterbury
College,
Math
and
Statistics,
Nursing
Academic
Integrity
Office,
Centre
for
English
Language
Development,
Human
Kinetics,
Centre
for
Executive
Education,
Residence
Services,
Centre
for
Career
Education
Organization
of
Part‐time
University
Students,
International
Student
Society,
Graduate
Students’
Society
Engineering,
Odette
School
of
Business,
Computer
Science,
Science
Table
FYS‐6:
Summary
of
the
number
of
participants
in
the
quantitative
or
survey
portion
of
this
research
#
of
Participants
31
47
22
Type
of
Participant
Total
#
of
Individuals
Survey
was
Sent
To
Response
Rate
Faculty
Service
Providers
1180
2.63
1269
3.7
Students
1720
1.28
35
SUMMARY
OF
RESULTS
FACULTY
INTERVIEWS
Emergent
Theme
A:
Language
Interviewed
faculty
(IF)
reported
that
language
is
one
of
the
major
issues
arising
for
international
students
(IS)
in
their
classes.
IF
reported
that
IS
in
their
classes
may
not
always
have
English
language
skills
that
meet
the
expectations
of
the
faculty.
A
language
problem
often
signals
a
mal‐ability
“to
function
in
English”
and/or
“comprehension”
issues,
which
may
result
in
poor
communication
not
only
with
professors
but
also
with
domestic
students.
IF
reported
that
an
underdeveloped
English
ability
affects
the
entire
education
experience
of
an
IS.
IF
reported
that
depending
on
the
individual
IS,
it
may
take
as
little
as
1
semester
to
1
year
for
the
major
language
issues
to
be
resolved
and
for
the
student
to
function
smoothly
in
English.
IF
identified
language
as
a
possible
barrier
to
IS
success
in
some
programs,
particularly
where
students
interact
closely
and
for
the
care
of
individuals.
For
example,
the
“nuances
of
communication”
in
English
may
at
times
be
a
“safety
issue”
for
IS
in
nursing
who
are
asked
to
interact
with
and
assess
the
needs
of
patients
in
verbal
or
written
English.
Some
IF
noted
a
difference
in
communication
skills
between
IS
and
domestic
students.
Some
IF
reported
that
while
some
IS
“may
have
concerns
about
writing/communicating
in
English
if
it
is
not
their
first
language,”
these
concerns
were
“generally
unwarranted.”
Some
IF
reported
that
the
work
of
IS
is
“clear
and
well‐organized,
but
contains
minor
grammatical
or
spelling
errors
that
can
be
easily
fixed
by
engaging
a
native
speaker
to
proofread
their
work
before
submission.”
Some
IF
identified
that
the
issue
of
unsatisfactory
communication
by
some
IS
was
more
an
issue
of
“self‐
consciousness”
and
a
need
for
“reassurance”
and
the
development
of
“a
strategy
to
overcome
any
residual
issues”
related
to
communication
rather
than
an
issue
of
“appropriate
skills.”
In
the
case
of
domestic
students,
some
IF
reported
that
“massive
problems
with
functional
literacy
at
the
level
expected
for
undergraduates,”
“arriving
late
to
class,”
“surfing
the
Internet”
during
course
time,
and
“chatting
while
professor
is
lecturing.”
Also,
IF
reported
that
contrary
to
IS,
domestic
students
showed
“little
recognition
of
their
problem
or
interest/effort
in
improving
these
skills”
in
communication.
IF
reported
language
issues
affect
IS
participation
in
daily
conversation,
oral
presentations
in
a
course,
communication
with
domestic
and
international
students,
as
well
as
preparation
of
an
academic
report
or
paper.
Sometimes,
IF
reported
that
IS
“struggle
to
put
their
ideas
together”
in
written
or
oral
format
such
as
an
essay
that
may
be
unfamiliar
to
them.
IF
suggested
that
incoming
IS
“keep
making
the
same
mistakes”
because
“they
can’t
apply
what
they
have
learned
because
they
have
never
done
it.
We’ve
taught
them
grammar
in
one
class,
then
we
take
them
over
to
a
writing
class,
but
do
the
two
ever
cross
over?
Maybe
we
should
combine
the
two.”
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
37
Some
IF
expressed
criticism
and
questioned
the
ethical
motivations
of
UW
accepting
students
whose
English
communication
skills
were
thought
insufficient:
Unfortunately,
in
certain
cases,
even
with
additional
guidance,
e.g.,
assistance
with
development
of
study
plans
etc.,
certain
students
lack
the
basic
English
language
skills
to
succeed.
Among
the
instructor
groups
with
which
I
am,
and
have
been
affiliated,
there
appears
to
us
to
be
a
lack
of
ethics
demonstrated
by
the
University
in
accepting
students
into
academic
programs
for
which
they
are
ill‐equipped
to
survive
from
a
basic
English
language
perspective.
Is
this
a
case
of
the
University
'selling
its
soul'
for
financial
gain?
The
University
pays
insufficient
attention
to
student
quality
at
the
time
of
admission.
One
IF
suggested
that
an
ideal
English
language
building
class
that
would
help
IS
build
adequate
language
skills
in
preparation
for
a
typical
university
classroom
would
incorporate
“listening
to
lectures,
a
lot
of
readings,
[and]
then
writing.”
In
this
class,
IS
would
learn
skills
which
may
not
be
easily
transferable
from
one
culture
to
another
and
which
may
take
time
to
master.
For
example,
IS
would
learn
“how
to
synthesize
and
summarize”
information,
as
well
as
reading
between
the
lines.
In
addition,
this
English
language
class
would
have
a
“comfortable
environment”
in
contrast
to
an
unadorned
and
bare
classroom
and
would
emphasize
group
work,
“exercises
of
learning
how
to
listen,
note
taking,
and
learning
how
to
make
inferences
from
what
you
are
reading.”
Emergent
Theme
B:
Culture
IF
reported
that
some
IS
complain
they
are
“lonely,”
“tired,”
and
“haven’t
made
friends.”
IF
recognized
that
some
IS
must
adjust
from
a
“strict
and
disciplined
environment”
to
a
University
environment
which
expects
students
to
be
autonomous
and
responsible
for
their
actions.
Additionally,
IF
reported
that
students’
use
of
“electronic
gizmos”
and
staying
up
to
late
both
result
in
inattentive
behaviors
particularly
for
courses
scheduled
in
the
AM
timeslots.
IF
also
reported
that
IS
struggle
with
adjusting
to
the
culturally
“different
food”
in
Canada
and
because
of
the
change
in
weather
IS
may
be
more
frequently
ill
in
the
first
couple
of
months
in
Canada.
Various
pressures
and
high
expectations
of
achievement
combine
to
create
a
“huge
pressure
cooker”
situation
for
some
IS.
IF
reported
inappropriate
behavior
from
some
IS.
For
example,
IF
reported
that
some
IS
“bargain
for
marks”
with
their
professors.
Primarily,
IF
consider
this
inappropriate
and
culturally
specific
behavior.
IF
deal
with
this
issue
by
reiterating
that
the
rules
apply
to
everyone
and
offering
feedback
and
comments
on
the
action
and
not
the
motivation
and
reason
behind
such
behavior.
In
addition,
IF
reported
other
issues
they
identified
as
culturally
derived
such
as
IS
willingness
to
respect
a
deadline
for
submitting
an
assignment
on
time
and
in
general
understanding
the
behavior
of
what
is
typical
and
untypical
behavior
in
Canadian
institutions
of
higher
education.
IF
reported
that
they
have
noted
a
difference
between
domestic
and
international
students
in
their
courses.
While
domestic
students
tend
to
“talk,
raise
questions,
and
be
37
more
active,”
IF
reported
that
IS
are
frequently
“more
silent”
than
domestic
students
in
their
course
and
tend
to
befriend
and
socialize
primarily
with
other
IS
from
their
own
or
similar
cultural
backgrounds.
Some
ways
the
IF
reported
dealing
with
these
behaviors
in
their
courses
include:
planning
for
group
work;
organizing
mixed
groups
of
domestic
and
international
students;
asking
that
students
present
their
work
in
oral
presentations;
and
talking
to
IS
individually
and
encouraging
them
to
communicate
with
people
they
may
not
typically
reach
out
to.
A
possible
barrier
to
integrating
into
and
participating
in
mainstream
society
is
the
heavy
onus
placed
on
incoming
IS
to
adapt
to
the
host
culture.
In
reflection,
some
IF
noted
that
putting
the
responsibility
on
IS
to
do
most
of
the
cultural
adjusting
furthers
the
Western
mindset
of
placing
the
responsibility
and
blame
in
case
of
failure
on
the
IS.
One
IF
in
particular
pointed
out
that
“the
university
and
also
the
local
student
organizations
can
do
something
to
reach
out
to
the
students
who
come
from
a
different
culture
because
when
you
come
from
a
different
culture
you
feel
disoriented,”
reserved,
unsure,
and
ill‐informed,
and
they
do
not
know
the
boundaries
of
the
new
culture:
Most
of
them
have
a
huge
[cultural]
shock.
They’re
not
used
to
the
learning
style‐the
way
most
people
report,
the
way
they
express
their
opinion.
They
learn
by
making
mistakes,
which
is
not
necessary.
It’s
up
to
the
University
to
close
this
gap.
Some
IF
see
the
“close
and
intimate
interaction”
in
their
weekly
classes
and
courses
as
an
opportunity
to
try
to
close
the
cultural
gap
between
IS
and
the
University.
IF
do
this
by:
• inviting
guest
speakers
from
different
organizations
to
help
students
understand
the
Canadian
school
system;
• using
“universal
examples”
in
their
teaching;
adjusting
their
vocabulary
and
jokes
during
lectures
and
for
the
purpose
of
making
themselves
understood;
• highlighting
a
global
perspective
in
their
classes
and
assigned
group
formations;
scheduling
assignments
away
from
important
holidays
of
the
religious
or
ethnic
group
in
their
classes;
and
• helping
students
on
a
one‐to‐one
basis
as
IF
are
approached
for
help.
IF
reported
that
some
IS
arrive
to
the
program
ill‐prepared
to
begin
their
studies.
IF
expectations
of
incoming
students
are
at
times
disappointed
by
incoming
IS
who
may
not
know
how:
to
use
a
computer;
to
use
various
programs
which
are
mainstream
in
the
department;
to
search
the
library
for
required
books
and
materials;
or
to
use
the
internet.
Furthermore,
IF
reported
that
sometimes
IS
“learn
differently”
than
Canadian
students
and
that
learning
and
teaching
styles
may
add
to
the
academic
difficulties
of
incoming
IS,
particularly
when
the
learning
in
some
countries
differs
from
the
student‐
centered
method
preferred
in
the
Canadian
education
system.
For
example,
students
from
countries
practicing
a
teacher‐centered
method
of
instruction
may
experience:
difficulty
speaking
out
in
class;
sharing
their
opinion;
asking
for
help
from
the
instructor;
“reading
between
the
lines;
and
understanding
inferences
in
oral
and
written
communication.
At
the
same
time,
IF
reported
that
IS
arriving
from
cultures
that
favor
a
teacher‐centered
methods
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
39
of
instruction
may
show
a
talent
and
aptitude
for
multiple
choice
and
fill‐in
the
blank
examinations.
As
one
IF
suggested,
this
may
be
an
explanation
as
to
why
IS
arrive
with
adequate
TOEFL
scores
but
are
inadequately
prepared
to
communicate
in
an
academic
environment
in
both
written
and
oral
English.
Some
IF
reported
that
exercising
“tremendous
amount
of
understanding,”
giving
the
student
“a
second
chance,”
providing
“extra
information”
on
the
subject,
and
allowing
for
“extra
time”
to
complete
assignments
are
some
of
the
ways
they
try
to
provide
assistance
to
IS
in
their
courses.
IF
reported
that
some
IS
do
not
ask
for
help
when
they
begin
to
struggle
academically
or
personally
because
of
cultural
reasons.
IF
reported
that
this
may
be
particularly
true
if
an
IS
comes
from
a
culture
where
“people
think
they
look
bad
if
they
say
something
wrong”
or
if
they
ask
for
help.
In
a
13
week
semester,
this
may
sometimes
lead
to
missed
opportunities
to
help
a
student
in
time
or
before
an
academic
crisis
develops
because
of
inaction.
Some
IF
propose
an
addition
of
a
course
to
the
regular
academic
schedule
of
IS
that
would
provide
“extra
support
for
IS”
who
struggle
in
their
adjustments.
Some
IF
reported
that
the
difficulties
IS
have
in
their
courses
have
a
great
deal
to
do
with
general
unawareness
of
the
difference
in
cultural
boundaries:
Then
there
are
some
boundaries
that
exist
here
in
Canada
that
do
not
exist
where
they
are
from,
such
as
not
expecting
someone
to
understand
not
to
take
your
words
literally.
We
could
provide
help
to
students
about
cultural
awareness
and
the
boundaries
that
we
have
here
in
Canada,
which
often
creates
a
lot
of
issues.
When
you
learn
about
the
Western
culture
in
your
own
country,
people
learn
it
in
a
very
stereotypical
fashion
and
it
is
not
really
so
and
it
doesn’t
show
the
immediate
differences.
When
[IS]
learn
this
way
and
come
here
to
apply
in
practice
for
sure
they
will
come
across
some
difficulties.
The
University
can
also
provide
workshops
to
help
[international]
university
students
to
adapt
to
the
culture
of
the
academy.
Emergent
Theme
C:
Racism
&
Discrimination
Some
IF
reported
discrimination
of
minority
faculty.
“There
are
some
key
departments
where
people
are
not
friendly”
to
minority
faculty.
IF
reported
that
staff
in
these
department
are
“cold
and
distant,”
“suspicious
of
you,”
and
in
general
“not
very
friendly.”
IF
consider
this
experience
with
discrimination
and
racism
as
a
“social
phenomenon”
that
you
cannot
get
rid
of
overnight.”
Some
IF
also
reported
on
the
racism
and
discrimination
experienced
by
IS
at
UW
and
the
Windsor
community.
IF
reported
that
they
had
observed
“classmates
of
international
students
frequently
are
rude
to
international
students
in
group
work”
and
that
IS
“complaints
about
the
selection
of
grad
students
follow
the
racial
demographics
of
certain
professors,
and
the
allocated
GA’s.”
One
IF
commented
that:
Students
experience
discrimination
when
renting
accommodation,
when
looking
for
prayer
spots,
when
forming
heterogeneous
groups
‐
it's
a
fact
of
life
in
Windsor–
39
________
for
example
is
a
timeless
insult
to
followers
of
Islam.
Here
people
don't
even
know
that
‐
ignorance
is
everywhere.
Some
IF
advocated
for
a
holistic
approach
of
teaching
and
learning.
A
part
of
a
holistic
approach
involves
“educating
people
[faculty,
staff,
students]
from
different
service
departments”
and
in
general
training
University
staff
in
an
ability
to
deal
with
IS
in
a
culturally
sensitive
way
and
in
a
way
which
would
help
them
grow
personally
and
professionally.
IF
identified
that
the
main
goal
of
retraining
service
staff
is
to
“bring
awareness,”
to
change
the
“habitual
way
of
doing
things,”
and
to
appreciate
having
IS
on
campus
and
the
richness
they
add
to
the
university
culture.
SERVICE
PROVIDER
INTERVIEWS
Emergent
Theme
A:
Language
Some
ISS
reported
on
the
difficulties
IS
experience
in
daily
“language
and
communication,
noting
that
“the
language
and
cultural
barrier
are
for
a
great
many
international
students
a
very
tall
barrier,
even
though
they
claim
to
be
educated
in
English.”
ISS
reported
language
barriers
as
“an
issues
when
[IS’s]
English
is
not
good
and
they’re
trying
to
describe
an
issue
they
have.”
Some
ISS
described
the
difficulty
in
trying
to
understand
what
and
IS
wants
or
needs
while
communicating
in
English.
Some
ISS
noted
the
importance
of
using
“inclusive
language”
in
their
communication
with
IS.
ISS
noted
that
they
avoid
“speaking
to
IS
in
terms
or
ideas
that
are
culturally
defined
as
North
American,”
in
general
“simplify”
their
speech
and
written
information,
and
may
offer
that
an
IS
submit
a
written
explanation
of
their
concern,
which
“almost
always
solves
the
issue”.
ISS
also
reported
using
a
multi‐layer
approach
in
their
assistance
of
IS:
I
offer
the
information
in
written
form
also
explaining
it
verbally
and
then
ask
if
they
have
any
questions.
In
a
non‐condescending
way
to
ask
them
to
confirm
the
information
verbally
so
that
you
can
verify
that
you
have
communicated
the
information
properly
and
they
have
understood
what
you
have
said
and
can
relate
to
the
functionality
of
it.
I
always
ask
them
to
review
the
information
and
if
they
have
any
further
questions
to
please
feel
free
to
call.
Speaking
in
person
can
also
help
some
people
to
feel
more
comfortable.
ISS
reported
on
the
challenges
of
face‐to‐face
communication
with
IS.
When
communication
barriers
arose,
ISS
would
ask
“other
staff
member
to
assist”
or
“politely
ask
[IS]
to
repeat
themselves
if
I
don’t
understand
what
they
are
asking
for.”
ISS
also
reported
the
personal
attention
and
care
they
take
in
their
support
of
IS.
Some
ISS
noted
that
they
may
regularly
inquire
“how
[IS]
are
doing”
or
“how
[IS]
are
adjusting
to
Canadian
culture.”
Other
ISS
noted
that
sometimes
communication
efforts
entail
not
only
a
detailed
explanation
but
also,
Tak[ing]
them
personally
to
area
they
are
asking
about.
Give
room
numbers
and
extension
numbers
if
looking
for
a
professor.
Ask
them
if
they
understand
information
I
have
given
if
not
try
and
use
different
words
or
directions
as
needed.
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
41
Emergent
Theme
B:
Culture
ISS
reported
that
they
use
“basic
common
sense”
in
their
culturally
sensitive
approach
toward
IS.
Some
ways
in
which
ISS
make
an
effort
to
be
culturally
sensitive
to
IS
are:
to
“keep
current
of
the
holidays
of
many
religions
with
the
help
of
the
human
rights
office
calendar;
making
an
allowance
for
prayer
time;
try
to
understand
the
IS’s
“perspective
which
is
often
informed
by
their
culture;”
in
general
staying
informed
and
aware
of
the
“political
and
socio
economic
issues
related
to
country;”
using
culturally
sensitive
language
and
mannerisms;
“approach
problem
solving
and
counseling
with
a
sense
of
cultural
understanding;”
and,
“treating
each
student
the
way
we
would
like
to
be
treated.”
In
a
less
formal
approach,
some
ISS
reported
that
a
willingness
to
“put
yourself
in
their
shoes”
helped
them
to
learn
about
the
cultures
of
other
students.
In
addition,
some
ISS
make
effort
to
provide
both
written
and
verbal
instructions
or
communication
and
to
remember
that
“just
because
someone’s
mother
tongue
is
not
English
doesn’t
mean
that
they
are
unintelligent.”
ISS
reported
that
becoming
knowledgeable
was
one
way
to
help
them
communicate
in
more
culturally
sensitive
manner
with
IS.
ISS
noted
that
they
because
knowledgeable
about
various
cultures
through:
their
own
interests;
from
conversations
with
IS;
and
the
human
rights
office
information.
Other
ISS
reported
that
their
reluctance
to
communicate
with
IS
stems
from
their
lack
of
knowledge
of
how
to
begin
a
positive
interaction:
Sometimes,
it's
difficult
to
know
how
to
start
with
breaking
the
ice
to
learn
more
about
a
student.
Sometimes
you
don't
want
to
just
say,
"where
are
you
from?"
and
assume
they
are
international
students
when
in
fact
they
might
have
lived
in
Canada
for
several
years.
I
worry
that
they
might
be
offended
by
my
assumptions
that
for
instance
they
qualify
for
WISE
instead
of
Work
Study.
Some
ISS
noted
that
they
“do
not
show
favoritism
to
any
one
group
or
ethnicity”
in
their
interactions
with
students
on
campus.
One
ISS
noted
that
their
work
environment
is
“a
place
where
cultural
differences
are
the
norm,
not
the
exception.”
Additionally,
ISS
sympathized
with
and
were
compassionate
toward
the
experiences
of
international
students,
noting
that
while
“in
some
cases
international
students
don’t
understand
the
implications
of
an
action,
I’m
sure
we
would
not
understand
all
of
the
acceptable
practices
in
their
home
country.”
Some
ISS
noted
that
they
make
a
conscious
effort
to
treat
all
students
on
campus,
including
IS,
equally
and
according
to
individual
needs:
I
can
say
that
I
try
to
be
aware
of
things
that
may
improve
our
interaction,
but
I
don't
make
so
much
of
an
effort
to
treat
international
students
differently
or
more
'sensitively'
than
I
do
another
student.
I
try
to
treat
all
students
equally
and
fairly
with
perhaps
added
time/patience
for
those
with
a
language
barrier
or
disability.
Some
students
prefer
to
sit
near
my
desk
to
speak
to
me,
some
prefer
to
stand;
it's
not
necessarily
culturally
specific
in
my
eyes
how
students
prefer
to
interact;
everyone's
different
and
I
try
to
create
an
environment
that
welcomes
these
differences.
41
ISS
described
issues
of
trust
when
interacting
with
IS.
Some
ISS
reported
that
some
IS
“from
certain
countries
do
not
like
to
listen
to
what
a
secretary
has
to
say
and
impatiently
push
to
meet
with
people
they
do
not
need
to,
cluttering
calendars
unnecessarily.”
ISS
described
this
as
an
issue
of
“trust”
in
the
staff
and
“what
they
are
talking
about”
as
a
“big
issue.”
Furthermore,
ISS
described
IS’s
lack
of
knowledge
in
and
impatience
for
the
processes,
procedures
“and
paperwork
that
has
to
be
done
and
which
takes
a
day
or
a
few
days
to
complete.”
ISS
reported
that
IS
“have
different
expectations
from
service
providers
than
domestic
students
and
usually
show
less
respect
to
people
who
work
at
the
University”
than
do
domestic
students.
Additionally,
ISS
reported
that
IS
harbour
“unrealistic
expectations”
of
what
to
expect
from
their
program
and
graduation,
citing
that
IS
are
disappointed
when
their
expectations
of
getting
a
job
in
Canada
and
Windsor
are
unmet
with
the
reality
of
their
experiences.
Some
ISS
described
“a
need
to
be
guarded,”
“on,”
or
“engaged
and
sensitive
to
a
great
many
factors
including
language,
customs,
and
comprehension”
around
IS
or
while
communicating
with
IS
“because
you
feel
like
you
may
be
unintentionally
offensive.”
Some
ISS
spoke
about
their
confusion
in
“not
knowing
when
it’s
OK
to
ask
about
their
culture
or
country.”
Some
ISS
described
the
importance
to
maintain
their
own
cultural
identity,
practices,
and
traditions.
For
example,
“Merry
Christmas
shouldn’t
be
offensive”
because
“I
don’t
find
Ramadan
offensive.”
One
ISS
offered:
“at
present,
international
students
do
not
seem
to
have
sufficient
orientation
in
their
new
environment
before
beginning
classes.”
For
example,
IS
need
a
lot
of
explanation
of
things
that
seem
basic
to
those
of
us
born
in
Canada.
For
example,
it
is
not
appropriate
to
expect
to
be
available
to
meet
on
a
Sunday
afternoon
at
3
pm.
Especially
when
you
send
the
request
on
Saturday.
Some
ISS
noted
that
IS
from
certain
countries
“like
to
negotiate”
to
get
their
way
while
IS
from
other
countries
“are
more
respectful
than
North
American
students.”
Additionally,
ISS
noted
that
some
IS
are
“more
persistent”
in
their
communication
and
interaction,
feel
entitled
and
tend
to
believe
that
because
they
are
international
students
they
deserve
special
treatment
and
are
not
subject
to
the
same
rules
as
the
rest
of
the
students.
Often
times,
in
direct
conversation
with
them,
their
first
sentence
begins
with
‘I
am
an
international
student..’
thus
already
setting
up
their
belief
that
they
should
somehow
be
subject
to
different
rules.
While
I
understand
that
they
have
come
from
another
country
and
many
of
our
cultural
norms
are
foreign
to
them,
they
also
must
understand
that
the
university
policies
are
not
nor
should
be
designed
to
give
preferential
treatment
to
the
international
student.”
Some
ISS
noted
that
the
presence
of
IS
on
a
university
campus,
programs,
and
courses
“provides
a
view
of
our
global
circumstance.”
Overall,
ISS
reported
that
they
enjoyed
interacting
with
IS,
that
they
“learn
from
international
students”
and
that
“meeting
and
getting
to
know
students
from
all
over
the
world
has
always
been
a
positive”
experience.
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
43
Having
hosted
some
international
students
for
the
Host
for
the
Holidays
program
was
an
amazing
experience
and
one
I
think
we
need
to
market
more
(earlier).
Doing
this
can
really
change
the
way
we
interact
with
international
students.
There
needs
to
be
more
events
like
this.
Perhaps
a
summer
BBQ
or
Host
for
Canada
day
event
for
international
students
staying
here
over
the
summer.
Some
ISS
described
the
initial
learning
curve
of
staff
and
personnel
in
the
initial
encounters
with
IS.
ISS
described
continued
improvement
in
interaction
with
international
students
after
some
experience
had
been
established:
My
experience
with
international
students
is
constantly
getting
better.
When
I
first
dealt
with
mostly
international
students
in
my
program
it
was
very
difficult
and
stressful
for
both
the
students
and
myself
due
to
the
volume
of
students
and
issues.
As
the
program
matures
and
my
knowledge
of
how
I
can
help
them
grows
there
are
less
issues
and
the
students
are
happier
as
their
problems
are
solved
quickly.
Some
ISS
described
the
need
“to
do
more
to
assist
international
students
once
they
arrive
on
campus.
They
are
thrown
into
a
new
academic
and
social
culture,
which
operates
in
a
language
other
than
their
mother
tongue
(generally),
are
generally
young
and
far
away
from
home.
From
what
I've
seen
there
is
not
enough
support
(academic
and
otherwise)
for
these
students,
nor
are
these
factors
considered
when
the
student
finds
him
or
herself
facing
difficulties.
Some
ISS
described
the
additional
support
the
University
of
Windsor
should
provide
to
appropriately
support
IS
in
their
transitions
into
the
academic
and
social
culture
of
Canada.
Generally,
ISS
described
a
need
to
assist
students
for
a
period
of
time
past
orientation
and
perhaps
in
a
structured
manner
throughout
the
initial
first
year(s).
Some
ISS
recognized
that
“part
of
the
responsibility
for
establishing
a
positive
experience
rests
on
the
international
students”
themselves
who
must
“make
an
effort
to
interact
with
different
cultures”
so
that
their
transitions
and
integration
experiences
are
easier
and
more
fluid.
Other
ISS
noted
that
it
“can
often
be
difficult
to
get
international
students
to
participate
in
extracurricular
activities.”
Emergent
Theme
C:
Racism
&
Discrimination
All
incidents
reported
for
the
purposes
of
this
study
were
isolated
incidents.
Generally,
racism
and
discrimination
incidents
occurred
“mainly
based
on
assumptions
made
about
members
of
a
certain
race
and
attaching
stereotypes
to
the
membership.”
Some
ISS
reported
experiencing
discrimination
and
sexism
felt
when
interacting
with
IS,
particularly
in
their
communication
with
IS
who
come
“from
cultures
where
women
are
not
viewed
as
being
in
positions
of
power.”
One
ISS
noted
that
while
they
make
an
effort
43
to
be
sensitive
to
cultural
differences
of
the
students
they
encounter,
it
might
happen
that
some
IS
discriminate
based
on
their
own
prejudices:
I
attempt
to
be
sensitive
to
cultural
differences
around
gender,
especially
women's
roles
and
sexuality
when
[addressing
an
international
student].
When
an
international
student
is
less
than
respectful
toward
me
(male
student),
I
gently
remind
him
that
there
is
an
appropriate
way
to
address
[others]
and
I
would
appreciate
that
he
abide
by
these
norms.
Some
ISS
reported
IS
having
shared
their
experiences
with
racism
and
discrimination
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
ISS
shared
stories
of
graduate
and
undergraduate
IS
who
were
told
by
their
professor
to
get
their
paper
“cleaned
up”
so
that
it
is
“readable.”
One
ISS
described
that
“an
instructor
made
a
comment
about
a
student’s
name”
and
the
student
felt
“a
little
embarrassed.
Another
ISS
reported
that
IS
have
“told
me
that
they
do
not
have
many
professors
who
take
an
interest
in
their
academic
progress.”
Another
student
told
me
that
[a
professor]
had
treated
him
very
unfairly.
He
believed
that
this
was
because
of
his
skin
colour
and
his
national
origin.
He
did
not
report
it
to
anyone...
except
me.
He
did
not
want
to
make
a
formal
complaint
because
he
feared
that
professor's
reaction
and
feared
that
other
professors
would
see
him
as
a
troublemaker
and
give
him
poor
grades.
As
far
as
I
know,
he
did
not
take
the
matter
further.
ISS
also
shared
stories
of
IS
reporting
racism
and
discrimination
with
police
services
and
at
the
administrative
level
at
the
University
of
Windsor:
particularly
when
registering
for
courses,
applying
for
insurance
etc.
The
racism
students
speak
about
is
not
always
overt
but
rather
being
shunted
from
one
department
to
another,
going
to
an
office
with
forms
to
be
completed
only
to
find
that
they
are
somehow
creating
a
great
imposition
for
a
staff
member,
and
so
on.
Some
ISS
reported
that
“group
work
is
a
real
problem”
for
IS
because
“white
students
often
ignore
the
contributions
of
students
of
colour
and
whether
they
are
international
students
or
not.
ISS
also
noted
occasions
when
“classmates
and
others
make
racial
slurs”
against
IS.
Some
ISS
reported
that
sometimes
racist
remarks
were
“loud
enough
to
be
overheard.”
For
example,
one
ISS
shared
that
an
IS
told
her
“her
classmates
called
her
a
dirty
p‐‐‐.”
ISS
observed
“racist
graffiti,
mostly
anti‐Arab,
anti‐Muslim,
anti‐
Jewish,
anti‐Indian,
and
anti‐Pakistani,
regularly
updated
in
the
bathrooms.”
Also,
ISS
reported
that
sometimes
racism
conflicts
experienced
by
IS
are
“with
other
international
students,
usually
related
to
conflicts
in
their
home
country.”
ISS
reported
witnessing
racism
and
discrimination
against
visible
minorities
in
the
wider
Windsor
community.
ISS
reported
on
a
feeling
in
the
community
of
Windsor
“that
international
students
are
taking
up
laces
in
classrooms
that
‘belong
to
Canadian
kids.’”
ISS
also
reported
that
IS
shared
experiences
of
racism
and
discrimination
in
the
workplace:
Students
coming
in
for
job
search
help
have
a
preconception
that
Canadian
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
45
employers
are
biased
towards
Canadian
workers.
when
asked
where
they
got
this
information,
they
state
they
were
told
by
their
friends
who
previously
studied
in
Canada
Some
ISS
agreed
that
“there
is
a
problem”
and
that
the
University
of
Windsor
“need
to
do
something
to
help
international
students…and
all
visible
minorities
students
at
this
university.”
One
ISS
commented
that:
International
students,
like
their
Canadian
counterparts,
must
live
in
a
pluralistic
society.
Part
of
that
experience
may
be
negative
and
quite
new.
Many
International
students
arrive
from
homogenous
states,
where
everyone
looks
and
acts
alike.
Learning
to
act
Canadian
in
order
to
function
more
readily
takes
time
and
some
mistakes.
However,
Canadians
should,
as
hosts,
learn
to
accept
the
differences
International
students
bring
to
the
table
and
should
not
be
allowed
to
disparage
or
embarrass
our
guests.
STUDENT
FOCUS
GROUPS
Emergent
Theme
A:
Culture
IS
reported
that
they
felt
difference
in
teaching
and
learning
existed
between
their
culture
and
the
culture
of
the
UW.
For
example,
IS
reported
enjoying
the
“practical
exercises
or
practical
examples”
assigned
by
some
professors.
They
reported
enjoying
their
“lectures,”
the
opportunity
to
catch
up
academically
during
study
week,
and
projects
that
“tend
to
make
you
think.”
IS
identified
difference
in
cultural
behaviors
of
students
in
their
courses.
While
taking
a
laptop
to
class
was
not
per
se
a
terrible
idea,
IS
frowned
upon
students
who
used
these
laptops
to
surf
the
Internet
and
various
social
media
websites
during
lecture
time.
Talking
during
lectures
was
also
identified
as
an
issue
by
IS.
IS
reported
that
professors
did
little
to
discourage
such
behavior
from
students,
and
that
they
themselves
were
“too
shy”
to
say
anything
to
the
disruptive
students
in
spite
of
the
disruption
to
their
learning.
Primarily,
IS
reported
being
satisfied
with
their
social
experiences
at
UW.
While
IS
“won’t
say
it’s
been
amazing”
their
experiences
also
have
not
been
“bad.”
They
identified
a
need
for
“more
friends”
as
one
possible
area
where
their
experience
may
improve
so
they
feel
less
“alone.”
IS
reported
that
it
is
generally
difficult
to
make
friends
with
Canadian
or
domestic
students
and
that
some
IS
“don’t
have
Canadian
students
as
close
friends.”
Some
IS
felt
that
because
of
“cultural
differences,”
domestic
students
“don’t
really
want
to
make
friends
with
international
students.”
One
IS
commented
that:
…some
stuff
they
are
interested
in
obviously
don’t
interest
me.
So,
I
understand
they
are
not
my
type
and
I’m
not
going
to
be
their
type.
And
I’m
not
going
to
discriminate
or
anything.
I
know
they
live
differently…
Their
way
of
thinking
is
different
than
our
way
of
thinking.
Maybe
that’s
why
we
can’t
connect.
45
Other
IS
reported,
“it’s
not
always
advisable
to
have
so
many
friends.”
Some
IS
reported
that
they
prefer
to
lead
a
less
social
lifestyle
that
is
“focused
on
their
studies”
and
education.
Some
IS
cited
their
parents’
financial
commitment
to
their
education
as
one
reason
for
focusing
on
their
studies.
Some
IS
felt
that
discussions
of
religion
and
their
own
religious
beliefs
might
lead
to
a
connection
with
domestic
students,
however,
those
who
discussed
their
religious
beliefs
openly
with
domestic
students
found
it
difficult
to
“talk
about
religion”
and
reported
that
domestic
students
felt
uncomfortable
and
uninterested
in
the
subject.
Emergent
Theme
B:
Frustration,
Disorientation,
and
Confusion
Overall,
IS
described
their
experiences
at
UW
as
positive
or
“good
“
but
also
“different”
and
“challenging.”
IS
reported
initial
feelings
of
excitement
and
anticipation
to
begin
their
school
year
and
life
in
Canada.
While
some
students
reported
satisfactory
experiences
with
the
Soft
Landing
Program,
others
indicated
that
their
initial
arrival
was
marred
by
“difficulty”
and
“frustration.”
In
particular,
the
Soft
Landing
program
missed
the
intended
mark
for
students
arriving
on
the
weekends
or
holidays
and
other
days
when
typically
the
UW
and
the
ISC
would
be
closed.
In
such
a
situation
where
no
one
from
the
ISC
or
the
Soft
Landing
program
was
available
to
greet
them,
IS
reported
that
they
sought
help
from
their
cab
driver,
residence
services,
people
they
encountered
on
campus,
and
whenever
possible,
family
and
friends
knowledgeable
and
able
to
assist
them
however
possible.
IS
satisfied
with
their
arrival
experience
reported
that
once
they
were
dropped
off
by
the
taxi
at
the
International
Student
Centre
at
Cody
Hall
they
were
met
by
“someone
who
helped
me
with
registration…gave
me
some
of
the
handouts
and
a
map
of
the
University
and
helped
me
to
find
places…I
met
some
of
my
friends,
my
neighbors…I
was
getting
things
together.
It
helped
a
lot.”
Some
recommendations
IS
made
for
what
could
have
been
done
to
improve
their
experience
included:
“there
should
be
someone
in
the
ISC
during
the
weekends
because
international
students
arrive
everyday;”
“the
Soft
Landing
Program
should
be
expanded
to
include
somebody
receiving
people
in
the
ISC,
beyond
taking
the
students
to
ISC;”
involving
someone
who
would
orienting
students
in
their
beginning
days;
arrangements
that
incoming
IS
“arrive
three
weeks
prior
[to
the
commencement
of
class]
so
that
they
get
used
to
their
environment
a
bit,
settle
down,
and
get
comfortable”
prior
to
the
beginning
of
the
school
year.
Some
IS
described
their
first
days
at
UW
as
“awful.”
Specifically,
they
noted
that:
they
could
not
properly
orient
themselves
using
the
campus
map;
they
could
not
find
the
supermarket
or
convenience
shops
to
purchase
food;
and
that
they
experienced
difficulty
in
adjusting
to
the
cool
environment
inside
university
buildings
and
the
hot
climate
outdoors.
One
IS
reported
that
they
“stayed
hungry
the
first
day”
because
they
did
not
know
where
to
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
47
find
food,
while
another
said
they
were
“very
sick”
the
first
few
months
partially
because
of
their
poor
nutrition
and
the
change
from
indoor
to
outdoor
climate.
Other
IS
identified
issues
specific
to
their
accommodations.
Particularly,
IS
spoke
of:
the
availability
of
fresh
halal
food;
relationships
with
roommates;
students
who
drank
too
much
and
were
inappropriate
in
the
shared
living
quarters;
being
rushed
out
of
residence
at
the
end
of
the
school
year;
the
layout
of
a
typical
dorm
room;
shared
co‐ed
bathrooms;
and
co‐ed
floors.
The
main
reason
for
discomfort
IS
cited
was
religious
beliefs
and
being
able
to
practice
their
religion
in
comfort
and
ease.
For
example,
one
IS
stated:
I
went
into
that
room
and
I
saw
just
the
closet
and
the
bed.
I
though,
where
is
the
bathroom
and
the
kitchen?
I
was
so
shocked
that
I
opened
the
doors
from
the
closet
to
see
what
is
in
there.
The
first
moment
I
couldn’t
handle
it
because
being
a
Muslim
the
way
you
have
to
perform.
You
have
to
pray
five
times
a
day
and
wash
before
every
prayer
and
wash
in
public
washrooms.
It
just
made
me
very
upset.
IS
identified
a
discrepancy
between
the
information
they
were
given
during
recruitment
and
the
environment
they
encountered
upon
arrival.
IS
reported
that
while
they
were
given
correct
information
prior
to
their
arrival
they
also
commented
that
they
were
not
given
“enough
information”
or
enough
“details”
about
the
state
of
daily
living
in
residence.
IS
noted
that
pictures
of
Windsor
and
UW
did
not
accurately
portray
their
lived
experiences
and
this
led
to
feeling
as
though
they
had
been
mislead
to
believe
incorrect
information.
IS
who
attended
orientation
reported
that
the
program
was
“very
helpful”
in
getting
oriented
to
the
new
environment
and
ready
for
the
new
academic
year.
Meanwhile,
IS
who
had
missed
the
orientation
reported
feeling
“lost,”
“disoriented,”
“confused”
and
in
general
uninformed
about
the
tacit
knowledge
within
higher
education
such
as
what
is
APA
format
and
what
is
a
uWin
account,
how
to
set
it
up,
and
why
it
is
useful.
Generally,
IS
recommended
that
it
would
be
in
their
interest
for
orientation
activities
or
seminars
to
continue
past
the
first
week
and
into
the
school
year,
theorizing
that
this
might
help
students
adjust
at
their
own
pace
and
as
need
arose.
IS
reported
that
what
helped
them
adjust
to
the
new
culture
and
life
in
Canada
was
a
combination
of:
• “friends”,
which
IS
typically
qualified
as
other
IS‐‐not
domestic‐‐students
they
have
met
because
of
interaction
in
their
classes
or
in
residence;
• their
religious
beliefs
and
convictions
and
the
ability
to
practice
their
faith;
• the
assistance,
help,
and
kindness
of
people
they
had
met,
such
as
their
roommates,
teachers,
and
friends;
• guidance
and
information
provided
by
the
ISC;
and
• support
and
encouragement
from
their
family.
47
Emergent
Theme
C:
Facilities
&
Services
IS
reported
that
some
of
the
facilities
that
have
been
most
useful
to
them
include
the
St.
Denis
Centre,
Leddy
library,
the
Academic
Writing
Centre,
and
the
Advisor
for
International
Students
&
Athletes.
Specifically,
IS
identified
group
study
areas
in
Leddy
Library
as
helpful,
the
recreational
resources
and
equipment
available
at
the
St.
Denis
Centre,
the
personal
care
and
compassion
shown
to
them
by
an
attentive
Academic
Advisor;
and
the
help
with
writing
they
received
at
the
Academic
Writing
Centre.
Standing
out
among
the
list
of
helpful
facilities
and
services
is
the
work
done
by
the
International
Student
Centre,
which
IS
described
in
unison
as
“a
home”
away
from
home.
For
some
IS
the
ISC
is
a
place
to
“hang‐out,”
“study”
and
spend
time
outside
of
their
residence.
One
IS
reported
that
“as
an
international
student
your
mother
and
your
father
is
the
ISC.
That’s
where
you
go
for
help.”
Primarily,
IS
felt
dissatisfied
with
tuition
fees,
residence
fees,
and
mandatory
meal
plans.
Some
suggestions
for
how
to
improve
their
experience
included
offering
a
greater
number
of
scholarships,
more
financial
assistance
programs,
and
an
increased
number
of
campus
work
opportunities
specifically
for
IS.
IS
reported
that
initiatives
intended
to
financially
assist
IS
would
be
wholeheartedly
welcome
and
supported.
In
addition,
IS
expressed
dissatisfaction
with
the
transportation
system
in
the
city
of
Windsor
and
the
availability
and
regularity
of
busing
in
the
outside
of
campus
community.
IS
reported
that
they
felt
isolated
on
campus.
Some
IS
also
reported
that
they
found
the
Windsor
community
“boring”
and
lacking
in
“things
to
do”
in
comparison
to
the
high
activity
of
a
metropolitan
area
such
as
Toronto
or
their
home
city.
Additionally,
IS
reported
that
the
lack
of
proper
or
readily
available
facilities
in
residence
to
cook
soured
their
experiences.
They
identified
that
residence
meals
typically
consisted
of
“fast
food,”
which
is
not
typically
consumed
on
a
regular
basis
in
their
home
countries
or
cultures.
Furthermore,
IS
reported
that
their
residence
accommodations
were
equipped
with
one
“microwave
on
each
floor”
and
a
“kitchen
in
the
basement.”
IS
described
these
as
inadequate
in
for
the
maintenance
of
a
healthy
diet
and
lifestyle.
Emergent
Theme
D:
Racism
&
Discrimination
IS
reported
that
they
experienced
racism
and
discrimination
in
the
school
community.
One
IS
in
particular
reported
that
a
room‐mate
had
used
the
“n”
word
in
reference
to
him,
further
stating
that,
“yeah,
that
was
wrong
but
I
got
along
with
him.
It
was
a
challenge.”
Some
IS
also
reported
that
they
“felt”
racism
from
professors,
teaching
assistants
(TA)
and/or
graduate
assistants
(GA)
in
their
courses,
stating
that
at
times
it
was
difficult
to
get
help
and
that
professors,
TAs
and
GAs
may
not
be
as
helpful
to
them
as
they
were
to
other
students.
IS
reported
that
racism
and
discrimination
“just
made
it
difficult…just
made
the
day
completely
bad
for
me.”
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
49
FACULTY
SURVEYS
An
e‐mail
invitation
was
sent
to
the
available
faculty
at
the
University
of
Windsor,
inviting
them
to
participate
in
on
on‐line
surveys.
The
recruitment
email
specified
that
the
survey
would
ask
faculty
to
report
on
their
experiences
with
international
students
at
the
University
of
Windsor
without
having
to
identify
themselves.
The
survey
was
sent
to
a
total
of
1180
faculty
at
the
University
of
Windsor
with
a
response
rate
of
2.62
percent.
Gender
Table
SF‐1
shows
the
frequencies
of
gender
of
the
participants
in
this
study,
which
shows
less
male
faculty
(N
=
13)
participated
in
this
study
than
female
faculty
(N
=
15).
In
other
words,
Table
SF‐1
shows
that
of
the
entire
sample
(N
=
31),
43.3%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
were
male
faculty
and
50%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
were
female
faculty.
Additionally,
Table
SF‐1
shows
that
one
respondent
identified
as
transgendered
(N
=
1)
and
the
response
of
one
respondent
was
missing
or
not
recorded
(N
=
1).
Table SF-1. Frequencies of biological gender of faculty respondents
Valid
Cumulative
Percent
Percent
Frequency Percent
Valid
Male
13
41.9
43.3
43.3
Female
15
48.4
50.0
93.3
Transgendered
1
3.2
3.3
96.7
Don't Know
1
3.2
3.3
100.0
Total
30
96.8
100.0
Missing System
1
3.2
Total
31
100.0
Age
Categories
Table
SF‐2
shows
the
frequencies
of
age
categories
of
the
participants
in
this
study,
which
shows
that
of
the
entire
sample
(N
=
31),
3.3%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
to
be
between
31‐35
years
of
age,
16.7%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
to
be
between
36‐40
years
of
age,
6.7%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
to
be
between
41‐45
years
of
age,
20.0%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
to
be
between
46‐50
years
of
age,
30.0%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
to
be
between
51‐60
years
of
age,
20%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
to
be
between
61‐65
years
of
age,
and
3.3%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
to
be
between
66‐70
years.
Additionally,
Table
SF‐2
shows
that
the
response
of
one
respondent
was
missing
or
unrecorded
(N
=
1).
49
Table SF-2. Frequencies of age categories of faculty respondents
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Percent
Valid
31-35
1
3.2
3.3
3.3
36-40
5
16.1
16.7
20.0
41-45
2
6.5
6.7
26.7
46-50
6
19.4
20.0
46.7
51-60
9
29.0
30.0
76.7
61-65
6
19.4
20.0
96.7
66-70
1
3.2
3.3
100.0
Total
30
96.8
100.0
Missing System
1
3.2
Total
31
100.0
English
as
a
First
Language
Table
SF‐3
shows
the
frequencies
of
English
as
a
first
language
of
the
participants
in
this
study,
which
shows
more
faculty
responding
to
the
survey
identify
English
as
a
first
language
(N
=
24)
than
faculty
who
do
not
identify
English
as
a
first
language
(N
=
7).
In
other
words,
Table
SF‐3
shows
that
of
the
entire
sample
(N
=
31),
77.4%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
identified
English
as
their
first
language
and
22.6%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
did
not
identify
English
as
a
first
language.
Table SF-3. Frequencies of English as a first language of faculty
respondents
Valid
Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent
Percent
Valid Yes
24
77.4
77.4
77.4
No
7
22.6
22.6
100.0
Total
31
100.0
100.0
Country
of
Origin
Table
SF‐4
shows
the
frequencies
of
country
of
origin
of
the
participants
in
this
study,
which
shows
more
faculty
responding
to
the
survey
identify
a
country
other
than
Canada
as
their
country
of
origin
(N
=
16)
than
faculty
who
identified
Canada
as
their
country
of
origin
(N
=
15).
In
other
words,
Table
SF‐4
shows
that
of
the
entire
sample
(N
=
31),
48.4%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
identified
Canada
as
their
country
of
origin
and
51.6%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
identified
a
country
other
than
Canada
as
their
country
of
origin.
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
51
Table SF-4. Frequencies of country of origin of faculty respondents
Valid
Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent
Percent
Valid Other- Not Canada3
9.7
9.7
9.7
Unspecified
Australia
1
3.2
3.2
12.9
Canada
15
48.4
48.4
61.3
England
1
3.2
3.2
64.5
Guyana
1
3.2
3.2
67.7
Ireland
1
3.2
3.2
71.0
Mainland China
1
3.2
3.2
74.2
Montenegro
1
3.2
3.2
77.4
Netherlands
1
3.2
3.2
80.6
North Africa
1
3.2
3.2
83.9
Philippines
1
3.2
3.2
87.1
UK
1
3.2
3.2
90.3
USA
3
9.7
9.7
100.0
Total
31
100.0
100.0
Status
Rank
of
Faculty
Table
SF‐5
shows
the
frequencies
of
status
rank
of
faculty
participants
in
this
study,
which
shows
that
of
the
entire
sample
(N
=
31),
14.3%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
identified
as
lecturers,
21.4%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
identified
as
assistant
professors,
42.9%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
identified
as
associate
professors,
and
21.4%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
identified
as
professors.
Additionally,
Table
SF‐5
shows
that
the
responses
of
3
respondents
were
missing
or
unrecorded
(N
=
3).
Table SF-5. Frequencies of status rank of faculty respondents
Valid
Cumulative
Percent
Percent
Frequency Percent
Valid
Lecturer
4
12.9
14.3
14.3
Assistant Professor
6
19.4
21.4
35.7
Associate
12
38.7
42.9
78.6
Professor
Professor
6
19.4
21.4
100.0
Total
28
90.3
100.0
Missing System
3
9.7
Total
31
100.0
51
Category
Term
Table
SF‐6
shows
the
frequencies
of
category
term
of
faculty
participants
in
the
survey
portion
of
this
study,
which
shows
that
the
greatest
number
of
faculty
identified
as
tenure
or
permanent
(N
=
20),
followed
by
faculty
who
identified
as
either
a
limited
term
appointment
(N
=
4)
or
probationary
tenure
track
(N
=
4).
In
other
words,
Table
SF‐6
shows
that
of
the
entire
sample
(N
=
31),
14.3%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
identified
as
limited
term
appointments,
14.3%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
identified
as
probationary
tenure
track
appointments,
and
71.4%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
identified
as
tenure
or
permanent
appointments.
Additionally,
Table
SF‐6
shows
that
the
response
of
3
respondents
were
missing
or
unrecorded
(N
=
3).
Table SF-6. Frequencies of category term of faculty respondents
Valid
Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent
Percent
Valid
Limited Term
4
12.9
14.3
14.3
Probationary Tenure
4
12.9
14.3
28.6
Track
Tenure/Permanent
20
64.5
71.4
100.0
Total
28
90.3
100.0
Missing System
3
9.7
Total
31
100.0
Level
of
Instruction
Table
SF‐7
shows
the
frequencies
of
level
of
instruction
of
faculty
participants
in
this
study,
which
shows
the
least
number
of
faculty
reported
teaching
exclusively
graduate
courses
(N=
2),
and
that
less
faculty
reported
teaching
both
graduate
and
undergraduate
courses
(N
=
13)
than
faculty
who
reported
teaching
exclusively
undergraduate
courses
(N
=
15).
In
other
words,
Table
SF‐7
shows
that
of
the
entire
sample
(N
=
31),
51.6%
of
the
respondents
were
faculty
who
teach
exclusively
undergraduate
courses,
6.6%
of
the
respondents
were
faculty
who
teach
exclusively
graduate
courses,
and
41.9%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
were
faculty
who
teach
a
mix
of
both
graduate
and
undergraduate
courses.
Table SF-7. Frequencies of level of instruction of faculty respondents
Valid
Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent
Percent
Valid 1 - Undergraduate
16
51.6
51.6
51.6
courses
2 - Graduate courses
2
6.5
6.5
58.1
3 - Both
13
41.9
41.9
100.0
Total
31
100.0
100.0
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
53
Number
of
Years
as
Professor/Instructor
Table
SF‐8
shows
the
frequencies
of
number
of
years
spent
as
a
professor
or
instructor
at
the
University
of
Windsor
of
faculty
participants
in
this
study,
which
shows
that
most
faculty
responding
to
this
survey
reported
teaching
between
0‐9
years
(N=
19)
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
Furthermore,
Table
SF‐8
shows
that
of
the
entire
sample
(N
=
31),
65.5%
of
the
respondents
were
faculty
have
taught
0‐9
years
at
the
University
of
Windsor
and
that
34.5%
of
the
respondents
were
faculty
who
have
taught
10
years
or
more
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
Additionally,
Table
SF‐8
shows
that
the
responses
of
2
respondents
were
missing
or
unrecorded
(N
=
3).
Table SF-8. Frequencies of number of years as professor/instructor of faculty
respondents
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
0-4
9
29.0
31.0
31.0
5-9
10
32.3
34.5
65.5
10-14
2
6.5
6.9
72.4
15-19
2
6.5
6.9
79.3
20-24
2
6.5
6.9
86.2
25-29
3
9.7
10.3
96.6
30+
1
3.2
3.4
100.0
Total
29
93.5
100.0
Missing System
2
6.5
Total
31
100.0
Faculty
Department
Table
SF‐9
shows
the
frequencies
of
faculty
department
of
participants
in
this
study,
which
shows
the
top
four
faculty
departments
participating
in
this
study
were:
Arts
and
Social
Science
(N
=
9);
Science
(N
=
7);
Business
(N
=
5);
and
Engineering
(N
=
4).
Additionally,
Table
SF‐9
shows
that
the
responses
of
two
respondents
were
missing
or
not
recorded
(N
=
12).
Table SF-9. Frequencies of faculty department
Frequency Percent Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Arts and Social
9
29.0
31.0
31.0
Sciences
Science
7
22.6
24.1
55.2
Business
5
16.1
17.2
72.4
Nursing
1
3.2
3.4
75.9
Law
1
3.2
3.4
79.3
Human Kinetics
1
3.2
3.4
82.8
Engineering
4
12.9
13.8
96.6
53
Don't Know
Total
Missing System
Total
1
29
2
31
3.2
93.5
6.5
100.0
3.4
100.0
100.0
Educational Background
Table
SF‐10
shows
the
frequencies
of
educational
background
of
faculty
participants
in
this
study,
which
shows
more
faculty
reported
having
an
educational
background
at
a
Canadian
university
(N
=
14)
than
faculty
who
reported
an
educational
background
at
an
international
university
(N
=
8)
or
faculty
who
reported
an
educational
background
at
both
a
Canadian
and
international
university
(N
=
8).
In
other
words,
Table
SF‐10
shows
that
of
the
entire
sample
(N
=
31),
46.7%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
having
an
educational
background
at
a
Canadian
university,
27.7%
of
participants
reported
an
educational
background
at
an
international
university,
and
26.7%
of
participants
reported
an
educational
background
at
both
a
Canadian
and
international
university.
Additionally,
Table
SF‐10
shows
that
the
response
of
one
respondent
was
missing
or
not
recorded
(N
=
1).
Table SF-10. Frequencies of educational background of faculty respondents
Valid
Cumulative
Frequency Percent
Percent
Percent
Valid
Canadian University
14
45.2
46.7
46.7
Both Canadian and
8
25.8
26.7
73.3
International University
International University
8
25.8
26.7
100.0
Total
30
96.8
100.0
Missing
1
3.2
Total
31
100.0
Organized Mentorship Program
Table
SF‐11
shows
the
frequencies
of
participation
in
an
organized
mentorship
program
of
faculty
participants
in
this
study,
which
shows
less
faculty
reported
participating
in
an
organized
mentorship
program
(N
=
1)
than
faculty
who
reported
not
participating
in
an
organized
mentorship
program
(N
=
28).
In
other
words,
Table
SF‐11
shows
that
of
the
entire
sample
(N
=
31),
3.4%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
that
they
participated
in
an
organized
mentorship
program
and
96.6%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
that
they
did
not
participate
in
an
organized mentorship
program.
Additionally,
Table
SF‐11
shows
that
the
responses
of
two
respondents
were
missing
or
not
recorded
(N
=
2).
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
55
Table SF-11. Frequencies of organized mentorship program
participation of faculty respondents
Valid
Cumulative
Percent
Percent
Frequency Percent
Valid
Yes
1
3.2
3.4
3.4
No
28
90.3
96.6
100.0
Total
29
93.5
100.0
Missing System
2
6.5
Total
31
100.0
IS Individual Performance in Course Work
Figure
SF‐1
shows
the
mean
of
faculty
ratings
of
individual
IS
performance
in
course
work
categories.
Respondents
were
asked
to
rate
IS
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
poor;
2
=
Not
very
good;
3
=
Satisfactory;
4
=
Very
good;
5
=
Excellent;
6
=
Not
applicable;
7
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
6
or
7
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SF‐1
shows
the
top
mean
rating
of
IS
individual
performance
by
faculty
were
in
overall
academic
performance
(M=
3.129),
lab
work
(M=
3.333),
understanding
of
course
knowledge
(M=
3.233),
mathematical
skills
(M=
3.471),
meeting
academic
demands
(M=
3.036),
which
faculty
on
average
rated
as
slightly
above
“satisfactory”.
In
addition,
Figure
SF‐12
shows
that
faculty
rated
individual
IS
performance
in
class
participation
(M=
2.5),
writing
assignments
(M=
2.346),
oral
presentation
(M=
2.615),
spoken
English
(M=
2.533)
and
finding
help
with
questions
or
problems
(M=
2.621)
as
less
than
“satisfactory”.
Figure
SF‐1.
Faculty
rating
of
IS
individual
performance
in
course
work
categories
55
IS Group Performance in Course Work
Figure
SF‐2
shows
the
mean
of
faculty
ratings
of
IS
group
performance
in
course
work
categories.
Respondents
were
asked
to
rate
IS
group
work
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
poor;
2
=
Not
very
good;
3
=
Satisfactory;
4
=
Very
good;
5
=
Excellent;
6
=
Not
applicable;
7
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
6
or
7
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SF‐2
shows
the
top
mean
rating
by
faculty
of
IS
group
oral
presentations
(M=
3.05)
in
course
work
as
slightly
above
satisfactory.
In
addition,
Figure
SF‐2
shows
that
faculty
rated
IS
group
performance
in
writing
assignments
(M=
2.773)
and
lab
work
(M=
2.889)
as
less
than
satisfactory.
Figure
SF‐2.
Faculty
rating
of
IS
group
performance
in
course
work
categories
Faculty Reporting Training in Cultural Differences, Cultural Sensitivity, and Culturally Specific
Learning
Figure
SF‐3
shows
the
percentage
of
yes
responses
of
faculty
reporting
training
in
cultural
differences,
cultural
sensitivity,
and
culturally
specific
learning
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
Respondents
were
asked
to
select
one
response
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Yes;
2
=
No;
3
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
3
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SF‐3
shows
35.48
%
of
respondents
indicated
having
received
training
in
cultural
differences
at
the
University
of
Windsor,
38.71%
of
faculty
respondents
indicated
having
received
training
at
the
University
of
Windsor
in
cultural
sensitivity,
and
17.24%
of
respondents
indicated
having
received
training
at
the
University
of
Windsor
in
culturally
specific
learning.
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
57
Planning for Cultural Differences, Cultural Sensitivity, and Culturally Specific Learning when
Designing Course Instruction
Figure
SF‐4
shows
the
mean
of
faculty
reporting
planning
for
cultural
differences,
cultural
sensitivity,
and
culturally
specific
learning
when
designing
course
instruction.
Respondents
were
asked
to
respond
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Almost
never;
2
=
Rarely;
3
=
Sometimes;
4
=
Often;
5
=
Almost
always;
6
=
Not
applicable;
7
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
6
and
7
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SF‐4
shows
that
faculty
respondents
indicated
that
they
“sometimes”
plan
for
cultural
differences
(M=
3.333),
cultural
sensitivity
(M=
3.679),
and
culturally
specific
learning
(M=
3)
when
designing
their
course
instruction.
Figure
SF‐3.
Faculty
reporting
training
in
cultural
differences,
cultural
sensitivity,
and
culturally
specific
learning
57
Figure
SF‐4.
Faculty
reporting
planning
for
cultural
differences,
cultural
sensitivity,
and
culturally
specific
learning
when
designing
course
instruction
The Effect of Training in Cultural Differences, Cultural Sensitivity, and Culturally Specific
Learning on IS Performance
Figure
SF‐5
shows
the
mean
of
faculty
rating
of
the
effect
of
training
in
cultural
differences,
cultural
sensitivity,
and
culturally
specific
learning
on
IS
performance.
Respondents
were
asked
to
respond
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Almost
never;
2
=
Rarely;
3
=
Sometimes;
4
=
Often;
5
=
Almost
always;
6
=
Not
applicable;
7
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
6
and
7
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SF‐5
shows
that
faculty
respondents
indicated
that
planning
for
cultural
differences,
cultural
sensitivity,
and
culturally
specific
learning
in
their
courses
more
than
“sometimes”
had
an
effect
on
IS
overall
academic
knowledge
(M=
3.105),
individual
class
participation
(M=
3.048),
and
understanding
of
course
knowledge
(M=3.105).
However,
faculty
respondents
indicated
that
planning
for
cultural
differences,
cultural
sensitivity,
and
culturally
specific
learning
in
their
courses
less
than
“sometimes”
had
an
effect
on
IS
group
work
writing
collaborations
(M=
2.929),
independent
oral
presentations
(M=
2.714)
and
group
oral
presentations
(M=
2.786).
Also,
faculty
respondents
indicated
that
planning
for
cultural
differences,
cultural
sensitivity,
and
culturally
specific
learning
in
their
courses
“sometimes”
had
an
effect
on
IS
independent
writing
assignments
(M=
3)
and
lab
work
(M=
3).
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
59
Figure
SF‐5.
Faculty
rating
of
the
effect
of
training
in
cultural
differences,
cultural
sensitivity,
and
culturally
specific
learning
on
IS
performance
Early Intervention Techniques
Figure
SF‐6
shows
the
percentage
of
yes
responses
faculty
rating
of
how
often
they
implement
early
intervention
techniques
to
assist
IS
who
are
experiencing
difficulties
in
their
class.
Respondents
were
asked
to
choose
one
response
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Almost
never;
2
=
Rarely;
3
=
Sometimes;
4
=
Often;
5
=
Almost
always;
6
=
Not
applicable;
7
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
6
and
7
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SF‐6
shows
that
more
than:
just
over
10%
of
faculty
respondents
indicated
that
they
“almost
never”
implement
early
intervention
techniques
to
assist
an
international
student
who
is
experiencing
difficulties
in
class;
15%
of
faculty
respondents
indicated
that
they
“rarely”
implement
early
intervention
techniques
to
assist
an
international
student
who
is
experiencing
difficulties
in
class;
45%
of
faculty
respondents
indicated
that
they
“sometimes”
implement
early
intervention
techniques
to
assist
an
international
student
who
is
experiencing
difficulties
in
class;
23%
of
faculty
respondents
indicated
that
they
“often”
implement
early
intervention
techniques
to
assist
an
international
student
who
is
experiencing
difficulties
in
class;
and
less
than
5%
of
faculty
59
respondents
indicated
that
they
“almost
always”
implement
early
intervention
techniques
to
assist
an
international
student
who
is
experiencing
difficulties
in
class.
Figure
SF‐6.
Faculty
rating
of
how
often
they
implement
early
intervention
techniques
to
assist
IS
experiencing
difficulties
in
class
Racism
Figure
SF‐7
shows
the
percentage
of
yes
responses
faculty
who
identified
that
international
students
had
reported
to
have
experienced
racism
in
the
Windsor
community,
at
the
University
of
Windsor,
in
class,
and
in
residence.
Respondents
were
asked
to
choose
one
response
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Yes;
2
=
No;
and,
3
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
3
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SF‐7
shows
that:
27.59%
of
faculty
respondents
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
racism
in
the
Windsor
community;
26.67%
of
faculty
respondents
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
racism
at
the
University
of
Windsor;
3.448%
of
faculty
respondents
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
racism
in
their
classes;
and
0%
of
faculty
respondents
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
racism
in
residence.
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
61
Figure
SF‐7.
Percentage
of
yes
responses
of
faculty
who
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
racism
in
the
Windsor
community,
at
the
University
of
Windsor,
in
classes,
and/or
in
residence
Ethnic Discrimination
Figure
SF‐8
shows
the
percentage
of
yes
responses
faculty
who
identified
that
international
students
had
reported
to
have
experienced
ethnic
discrimination
in
the
Windsor
community,
at
the
University
of
Windsor,
in
class,
and
in
residence.
Respondents
were
asked
to
choose
one
response
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Yes;
2
=
No;
and,
3
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
3
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SF‐8
shows
that:
53.85%
of
faculty
respondents
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
ethnic
discrimination
in
the
Windsor
community;
52.17%
of
faculty
respondents
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
ethnic
discrimination
at
the
University
of
Windsor;
62.5%
of
faculty
respondents
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
ethnic
discrimination
in
their
classes;
and
45.83%
of
faculty
respondents
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
ethnic
discrimination
in
residence.
61
Figure
SF‐8.
Percentage
of
yes
responses
of
faculty
who
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
ethnic
discrimination
in
the
Windsor
community,
at
the
University
of
Windsor,
in
classes,
and/or
in
residence
IS Interaction with Domestic Students
Figure
SF‐9
shows
the
mean
of
faculty
responses
identifying
IS
interaction
with
domestic
students
in
class
in:
sitting
together;
working
together;
studying
together;
talking
to
one
another;
and
are
friendly
toward
one
another.
Respondents
were
asked
to
rate
each
category
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Almost
never;
2
=
Rarely;
3
=
Sometimes;
4
=
Often;
5
=
Almost
always;
6
=
Not
applicable;
7
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
6
and
7
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
There
were
no
recorded
responses
for
the
“sit
together”
category.
Figure
SF‐9
shows
that
faculty
observed
that
in
class
IS
and
domestic
students
more
than
“sometimes”
working
together
(M=
3.724),
studying
together
(M=
3.273),
and
talking
to
one
another
(M=
3.828).
Also,
Figure
SF‐9
shows
that
faculty
observed
that
in
class
IS
and
domestic
students
more
than
often
were
friendly
toward
one
another
(M=
4.179).
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
63
Figure
SF‐9.
Faculty
observations
of
frequency
of
IS
interactions
with
domestic
students
Figure
SF‐10.
Academic
improvements
from
which
IS
may
benefit
63
Academic Improvements from which IS May Benefit
Figure
SF‐10
shows
the
mean
of
faculty
responses
identifying
academic
improvements
from
which
IS
may
benefit:
English
writing
skills;
oral
or
spoken
English
skills;
presentation
skills;
research
skills;
knowledge
of
university
policies;
general
improvement
in
knowledge
base;
math
skills;
and,
academic
integrity
knowledge.
Respondents
were
asked
to
rate
each
category
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Almost
never;
2
=
Rarely;
3
=
Sometimes;
4
=
Often;
5
=
Almost
always;
6
=
Not
applicable;
7
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
6
and
7
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SF‐10
shows
that
faculty
noted
IS
may
more
than
“sometimes”
benefit
from
the
following
academic
improvements:
English
writing
skills
(M=
3.2);
oral
or
spoken
English
skills
(M=
3.5);
presentation
skills
(M=
3.316);
research
skills
(M=
3.056);
general
improvement
in
knowledge
base
(M=
3.056);
and,
academic
integrity
knowledge
(M=
3.375).
Also,
Figure
SF‐10
shows
that
faculty
noted
IS
may
“sometimes”
benefit
from
academic
improvement
in
math
skills
(M=
3)
and
knowledge
of
university
policies
(M=
3).
Social and Life Skills Improvements from which IS May Benefit
Figure
SF‐11
shows
the
mean
of
faculty
responses
identifying
social
and
life
skills
improvements
from
which
IS
may
benefit:
communication
skills;
socialization
skills;
handing
in
assignments
on
time;
getting
to
class
on
time;
and
attending
class
regularly.
Respondents
were
asked
to
rate
each
category
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Almost
never;
2
=
Rarely;
3
=
Sometimes;
4
=
Often;
5
=
Almost
always;
6
=
Not
applicable;
7
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
6
and
7
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SF‐11
shows
that
faculty
noted
IS
may
more
than
“sometimes”
benefit
from
the
following
academic
improvements:
communication
skills
(M=
3.15);
socialization
skills
(M=
3.118);
and,
handing
in
assignments
on
time
(M=
3.474);
and
getting
to
class
on
time
(M=
3.15).
Also,
Figure
SF‐11
shows
that
faculty
noted
IS
may
“sometimes”
benefit
from
attending
class
regularly
(M=
3).
Figure
SF‐11.
Social
and
life
skills
improvements
from
which
IS
may
benefit
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
65
Faculty Inspired Interaction Between IS and Domestic Students
Figure
SF‐12
shows
the
mean
of
faculty
responses
identifying
ways
in
which
faculty
report
inspiring
interaction
in
class
between
IS
and
domestic
students
through
activities,
group
work,
presentations,
and
out
of
class
activities.
Respondents
were
asked
to
rate
each
category
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Almost
never;
2
=
Rarely;
3
=
Sometimes;
4
=
Often;
5
=
Almost
always;
6
=
Not
applicable;
7
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
6
and
7
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SF‐12
shows
that
faculty
more
than
“sometimes”
inspire
interaction
between
IS
and
domestic
students
in
class
through
activities
(M=
3.792)
and,
presentations
(M=
3.542).
Faculty
reported
that
they
almost
“often”
inspire
interaction
between
IS
and
domestic
students
in
their
classes
through
group
work
(M=
3.963).
Also,
Figure
SF‐12
shows
that
faculty
reported
more
than
“rarely”
inspiring
interaction
between
IS
and
domestic
students
through
out
of
class
activities
(M=
2.389).
Figure
SF‐12.
Faculty
identifying
ways
in
which
faculty
report
inspiring
interaction
between
IS
and
domestic
students
Culture of the University of Windsor
Figure
SF‐13
shows
the
mean
of
faculty
rating
of
the
culture
of
the
University
of
Windsor
in
recruiting
IS
in
their
home
country,
accepting
IS,
welcoming
IS,
involving
IS,
and
servicing
IS.
Respondents
were
asked
to
rate
each
category
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Poor;
2
=
Not
very
good;
3
=
Satisfactory;
4
=
Very
good;
5
=
Excellent;
6
=
Not
applicable;
7
65
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
6
and
7
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SF‐13
shows
that
faculty
rated
the
culture
of
the
University
of
Windsor
in
recruiting
IS
(M=
3.381),
accepting
IS
(M=
3.583),
and
welcoming
IS
(M=
3.407)
as
above
“satisfactory.”
However,
faculty
rated
the
culture
of
the
University
of
Windsor
in
involving
IS
(M=
2.952)
and
servicing
IS
(M=
2.75)
as
less
than
“satisfactory.”
Figure
SF‐13.
Faculty
rating
of
the
culture
of
the
University
of
Windsor
in
recruiting,
accepting,
welcoming,
involving,
and
servicing
IS
Culture of the Faculty/Department
Figure
SF‐14
shows
the
mean
of
faculty
rating
of
the
culture
of
their
faculty
or
department
in
accepting
IS,
welcoming
IS,
involving
IS,
and
servicing
IS.
Respondents
were
asked
to
rate
each
category
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Poor;
2
=
Not
very
good;
3
=
Satisfactory;
4
=
Very
good;
5
=
Excellent;
6
=
Not
applicable;
7
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
6
and
7
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SF‐14
shows
that
faculty
rated
the
culture
of
their
faculty
or
department
in
accepting
IS
(M=
3.926)
as
just
under
“very
good”
and
in
welcoming
IS
(M=
3.778),
involving
IS
(M=
3.741)
and
servicing
IS
(M=
3.375)
as
more
than
“satisfactory.”
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
67
Figure
SF‐14.
Faculty
rating
of
the
culture
of
their
faculty/department
in
accepting,
welcoming,
involving,
and
servicing
IS
Culture of Courses
Figure
SF‐15
shows
the
mean
of
faculty
rating
of
the
culture
of
their
course
in
accepting
IS,
welcoming
IS,
involving
IS,
and
servicing
IS.
Respondents
were
asked
to
rate
each
category
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Poor;
2
=
Not
very
good;
3
=
Satisfactory;
4
=
Very
good;
5
=
Excellent;
6
=
Not
applicable;
7
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
6
and
7
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SF‐15
shows
that
faculty
rated
the
culture
of
their
course
in
accepting
IS
(M=
4.16),
welcoming
IS
(M=
4.08),
and
involving
IS
(M=
4.04)
as
above
“very
good.”
Also,
Graph
ST‐15
shows
that
faculty
rated
the
culture
of
their
course
in
servicing
IS
(M=
3.857)
as
above
“satisfactory.”
Faculty
Overall
Experience
with
IS
Figure
SF‐16
shows
the
mean
of
faculty
rating
of
their
experiences
with
IS
in
course,
in
the
department/faculty,
and
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
Respondents
were
asked
to
rate
each
category
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Poor;
2
=
Not
very
good;
3
=
Satisfactory;
4
=
Very
good;
5
=
Excellent;
6
=
Not
applicable;
7
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
6
and
7
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SF‐16
shows
that
faculty
rated
their
overall
experiences
with
IS
in
courses
(M=
3.448),
in
the
67
department/faculty
(M=
3.571),
and
at
the
University
of
Windsor
(M=
3.111)
as
above
“satisfactory.”
Figure
SF‐15.
Faculty
rating
of
the
culture
of
their
course
in
accepting,
welcoming,
involving,
and
servicing
IS
Figure
SF‐16.
Faculty
rating
of
overall
experiences
with
IS
in
courses,
in
the
department/faculty,
and
at
the
University
of
Windsor
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
69
SERVICE
PROVIDER
SURVEYS
An
e‐mail
invitation
was
sent
to
the
available
service
providers
at
the
University
of
Windsor,
inviting
them
to
participate
in
on
on‐line
surveys.
The
recruitment
email
specified
that
the
survey
would
ask
service
providers
to
report
on
their
experiences
with
international
students
at
the
University
of
Windsor
without
having
to
identify
themselves.
The
survey
was
sent
to
a
total
of
1269
service
providers
at
the
University
of
Windsor
and
resulted
in
a
response
rate
of
3.7
percent.
Gender
Table
SP‐1
shows
the
frequencies
of
gender
of
the
service
provider
participants
in
this
study,
which
shows
less
male
faculty
(N
=
16)
participated
in
this
study
than
female
faculty
(N
=
18).
In
other
words,
Table
SP‐1
shows
that
of
the
entire
sample
(N
=
47),
34.0%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
were
male
faculty
and
59.6%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
were
female
faculty.
Additionally,
Table
SP‐1
shows
three
missing
responses
(N
=
3).
Table
SP‐1.
Frequency
of
service
providers
biological
gender
Frequency
Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid
Male
16
34.0
36.4
36.4
Female
28
59.6
63.6
100.0
Total
44
93.6
100.0
Missing
System
3
6.4
Total
47
100.0
Table
SP‐2.
Frequency
of
service
providers
by
gender
Frequency
Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid
21‐25
1
2.1
2.3
2.3
26‐30
3
6.4
7.0
9.3
31‐35
5
10.6
11.6
20.9
36‐40
5
10.6
11.6
32.6
41‐45
7
14.9
16.3
48.8
46‐50
8
17.0
18.6
67.4
51‐60
10
21.3
23.3
90.7
61‐65
2
4.3
4.7
95.3
66‐70
2
4.3
4.7
100.0
Total
43
91.5
100.0
Missing
System
4
8.5
Total
47
100.0
69
Age
Categories
Table
SP‐2
shows
the
frequencies
of
age
categories
of
the
participants
in
this
study,
which
shows
that
of
the
entire
sample
(N
=
47),
2.3%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
to
be
between
21‐25
years
of
age,
7.0%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
to
be
between
26‐30
years
of
age,
11.6%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
to
be
between
31‐35
years
of
age,
11.6%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
to
be
between
36‐40
years
of
age,
16.3%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
to
be
between
41‐45
years
of
age,
18.6%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
to
be
between
46‐50
years
of
age,
23.3%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
to
be
between
51‐60
years
of
age,
4.7%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
to
be
between
61‐65
years
of
age,
and
4.7%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
to
be
between
66‐70
years.
Additionally,
Table
SP‐
2
shows
that
the
responses
of
four
respondents
were
missing
or
unrecorded
(N
=
1).
English
as
a
First
Language
Table
SP‐3
shows
the
frequencies
of
English
as
a
first
language
of
the
participants
in
this
study,
which
shows
more
service
providers
responding
to
the
survey
identify
English
as
a
first
language
(N
=
38)
than
service
providers
who
do
not
identify
English
as
a
first
language
(N
=
7).
In
other
words,
Table
SP‐3
shows
that
of
the
entire
sample
(N
=
47),
84.4%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
identified
English
as
their
first
language
and
15.6%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
did
not
identify
English
as
a
first
language.
Table
SP‐3.
Frequency
of
service
providers
self­identifying
English
as
a
first
language
Frequency
Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid
Yes
38
80.9
84.4
84.4
No
7
14.9
15.6
100.0
Total
45
95.7
100.0
Missing
System
2
4.3
Total
47
100.0
Table
SP‐4.
Frequency
of
service
providers
country
of
origin
Frequency
Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid
Canada
36
76.6
83.7
83.7
Other
7
14.9
16.3
100.0
Total
43
91.5
100.0
Missing
0
1
2.1
7
2
4.3
System
1
2.1
Total
4
8.5
Total
47
100.0
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
71
Country
of
Origin
Table
SP‐4
shows
the
frequencies
of
country
of
origin
of
the
participants
in
this
study,
which
shows
more
service
providers
responding
to
the
survey
identify
Canada
as
their
country
of
origin
(N
=
36)
than
service
providers
who
identified
a
country
other
than
Canada
as
their
country
of
origin
(N
=
7).
Of
the
entire
sample
(N
=
47),
83.7%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
identified
Canada
as
their
country
of
origin
and
16.3%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
identified
a
country
other
than
Canada
as
their
country
of
origin.
Employment
Status
of
Service
Providers
Table
SP‐5
shows
the
frequencies
of
employment
status
of
service
provider
participants
in
this
study,
which
shows
that
of
the
entire
sample
(N
=
47),
20.5%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
identified
as
part‐time
employees
and
79.5%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
identified
as
full‐time
employees.
Additionally,
Table
SP‐5
shows
that
the
responses
of
3
respondents
were
missing
or
unrecorded
(N
=
3).
Table
SP‐5.
Frequency
of
service
providers
employment
status
Valid
Cumulative
Frequency
Percent
Percent
Percent
Valid
Part‐time
9
19.1
20.5
20.5
Full‐time
35
74.5
79.5
100.0
Total
44
93.6
100.0
Missin Don't
2
4.3
g
know
System
1
2.1
Total
3
6.4
Total
47
100.0
Table
SP‐6.
Frequency
of
level
of
IS
serviced
as
reported
by
service
providers
Valid
Cumulative
Percent
Percent
Frequency
Percent
Valid
Undergraduates
12
25.5
27.3
27.3
Graduates
4
8.5
9.1
36.4
Both
28
59.6
63.6
100.0
Total
44
93.6
100.0
Missing
Don't
know
2
4.3
System
1
2.1
Total
3
6.4
Total
47
100.0
Level
of
Service
Table
SP‐6
shows
the
frequencies
of
level
of
IS
serviced
as
reported
by
participants
in
this
study,
which
shows
the
least
number
of
service
providers
reported
servicing
71
exclusively
graduate
courses
(N=
4),
and
that
less
faculty
reported
servicing
exclusively
undergraduates
(N
=
12)
than
service
providers
who
reported
servicing
both
undergraduates
and
graduates
(N
=
28).
In
other
words,
Table
SP‐6
shows
that
of
the
entire
sample
(N
=
47),
27.3%
of
the
respondents
were
support
staff
who
service
exclusively
undergraduates,
9.1%
of
the
respondents
were
support
staff
who
service
exclusively
graduates,
and
63.6%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
service
a
mix
of
both
graduate
and
undergraduate
students.
Number
of
Years
as
Service
Provider
Table
SP‐7
shows
the
frequencies
of
number
of
years
spent
as
a
service
provider
or
support
staff
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
Most
respondents
to
this
survey
reported
between
5‐9
years
(N=
5)
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
Furthermore,
Table
SP‐7
shows
that
of
the
entire
sample
(N
=
47)
40.4%
of
the
responses
were
missing
or
unrecorded
(N
=
28).
Table
SP‐7.
Frequency
of
number
of
years
as
service
providers
at
the
University
of
Windsor
Frequency
Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid
0‐4
3
6.4
15.8
15.8
5‐9
5
10.6
26.3
42.1
10‐14
1
2.1
5.3
47.4
15‐19
4
8.5
21.1
68.4
20‐24
1
2.1
5.3
73.7
25‐29
2
4.3
10.5
84.2
30+
3
6.4
15.8
100.0
Total
19
40.4
100.0
Missing
System
28
59.6
Total
47
100.0
Educational
Background
Table
SP‐8
shows
the
frequencies
of
educational
background
of
participants
in
this
study,
which
shows
more
service
providers
reported
having
an
educational
background
at
a
Canadian
university
(N
=
36)
than
service
providers
who
reported
an
educational
background
at
an
international
university
(N
=
3)
or
service
providers
who
reported
an
educational
background
at
both
a
Canadian
and
international
university
(N
=
7).
In
other
words,
Table
SP‐8
shows
that
of
the
entire
sample
(N
=
47),
78.3%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
having
an
educational
background
at
a
Canadian
university,
6.4%
of
participants
reported
an
educational
background
at
an
international
university,
and
14.9%
of
participants
reported
an
educational
background
at
both
a
Canadian
and
international
university.
Additionally,
Table
SP‐8
shows
that
the
response
of
one
respondent
was
missing
or
not
recorded
(N
=
1).
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
73
Table
SP‐8.
Frequency
of
service
providers
educational
background
Frequency
Percent
Valid
Percent
Cumulative
Percent
Valid
Canadian
education
36
76.6
78.3
78.3
Both
Canadian
&
7
14.9
15.2
93.5
international
education
International
3
6.4
6.5
100.0
education
Total
46
97.9
100.0
Missing
System
1
2.1
Total
47
100.0
Organized
Mentorship
Program
Table
SP‐9
shows
the
frequencies
of
participation
in
an
organized
mentorship
program
of
participants
in
this
study,
which
shows
less
service
providers
reported
participating
in
an
organized
mentorship
program
(N
=
7)
than
service
providers
who
reported
not
participating
in
an
organized
mentorship
program
(N
=
13).
In
other
words,
Table
SP‐9
shows
that
of
the
entire
sample
(N
=
31),
14.9%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
that
they
participated
in
an
organized
mentorship
program
and
27.7%
of
the
respondents
in
this
study
reported
that
they
did
not
participate
in
an
organized
mentorship
program.
Additionally,
Table
SP‐9
shows
that
the
responses
of
twenty‐seven
respondents
were
missing
or
not
recorded
(N
=
27).
Table
SP‐9.
Frequency
of
service
providers
reporting
participation
in
organized
student
mentor
program
Valid
Cumulative
Frequency
Percent
Percent
Percent
Valid
Yes
7
14.9
35.0
35.0
No
13
27.7
65.0
100.0
Total
20
42.6
100.0
Missing
Don't
Know
13
27.7
System
14
29.8
Total
27
57.4
Total
47
100.0
Training
in
Cultural
Differences,
Cultural
Sensitivity,
and
Culturally
Specific
Learning
Figure
SP‐1
shows
the
percentage
of
yes
responses
of
service
providers
reporting
training
in
cultural
differences,
cultural
sensitivity,
and
culturally
specific
learning
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
Respondents
were
asked
to
select
one
response
for
each
category
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Yes;
2
=
No;
3
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
3
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SP‐1
shows
57.78
%
of
respondents
indicated
having
received
training
in
cultural
differences
at
the
University
of
73
Windsor,
54.55%
of
respondents
indicated
having
received
training
at
the
University
of
Windsor
in
cultural
sensitivity,
and
17.07%
of
respondents
indicated
having
received
training
at
the
University
of
Windsor
in
culturally
specific
learning.
Consideration
of
Cultural
Difference,
Cultural
Sensitivity,
and
Culturally
Specific
Learning
when
Servicing
IS
Figure
SP‐2
shows
the
mean
of
service
providers
reporting
consideration
for
cultural
differences,
cultural
sensitivity,
and
culturally
specific
learning
when
servicing
IS.
Respondents
were
asked
to
respond
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Almost
never;
2
=
Rarely;
3
=
Sometimes;
4
=
Often;
5
=
Almost
always;
6
=
Not
applicable;
7
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
6
and
7
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SP‐2
shows
that
service
providers
indicated
that
they
more
than
“often”
consider
cultural
differences
(M=
4.311)
and
cultural
sensitivity
(M=
4.349)
when
servicing
IS.
Also,
service
providers
indicated
that
they
more
than
“sometimes”
consider
culturally
specific
learning
(M=
3.324)
when
servicing
IS.
Figure
SP‐1.
Service
providers
reporting
having
received
training
in
cultural
differences,
cultural
sensitivity,
and
culturally
specific
learning
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
75
Figure
SP‐2.
Service
providers
reporting
consideration
for
cultural
differences,
cultural
sensitivity,
and
culturally
specific
learning
when
servicing
IS
Early
Intervention
Techniques
Figure
SP‐3
shows
the
percentage
of
yes
responses
of
service
providers
rating
of
how
often
their
office/department
implement
early
intervention
to
assist
IS
with
success
in
the
following
areas:
course
completion
and
success;
program
completion;
year‐to‐year
advancement;
and,
progress
toward
graduation.
Respondents
were
asked
to
rate
each
category
response
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Almost
never;
2
=
Rarely;
3
=
Sometimes;
4
=
Often;
5
=
Almost
always;
6
=
Not
applicable;
7
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
6
and
7
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SP‐3
shows
that
their
office/department
more
than
“sometimes”
implement
early
intervention
strategies
to
assist
IS
with
course
completion
(M=
3.429),
program
completion
(M=
3.3)
and
progression
toward
graduation
(M=
3.3).
Also,
service
providers
indicated
that
their
office/department
“sometimes”
implement
early
intervention
strategies
to
assist
IS
with
progression
from
year‐to‐year
(M=
3).
75
Figure
SP‐3.
Service
provider
rating
of
how
often
their
office/department
implements
early
intervention
techniques
to
assist
IS
experiencing
difficulties
Racism
Figure
SP‐4
shows
the
percentage
of
yes
responses
by
service
providers
who
identified
that
international
students
reported
to
have
experienced
racism
in
the
Windsor
community,
at
the
University
of
Windsor,
in
class,
and
in
residence.
Respondents
were
asked
to
choose
one
response
to
each
category
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Yes;
2
=
No;
and,
3
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
3
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SP‐4
shows
that:
45.45%
of
respondents
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
racism
in
the
Windsor
community;
57.58%
of
respondents
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
racism
at
the
University
of
Windsor;
15%
of
respondents
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
racism
in
their
classes;
and
21.05%
of
respondents
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
racism
in
residence.
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
77
Figure
SP‐4.
Percentage
of
yes
responses
of
service
providers
who
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
racism
in
the
Windsor
community,
at
the
University
of
Windsor,
in
classes,
and/or
in
residence
Ethnic
Discrimination
Figure
SP‐5
shows
the
percentage
of
yes
responses
service
providers
who
identified
that
international
students
reported
to
have
experienced
ethnic
discrimination
in
the
Windsor
community,
at
the
University
of
Windsor,
in
class,
and
in
residence.
Respondents
were
asked
to
choose
one
response
for
each
category
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Yes;
2
=
No;
and,
3
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
3
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SP‐5
shows
that:
54.17%
of
respondents
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
ethnic
discrimination
in
the
Windsor
community;
50%
of
respondents
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
ethnic
discrimination
at
the
University
of
Windsor;
64.29%
of
respondents
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
ethnic
discrimination
in
their
classes;
and
75%
of
respondents
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
ethnic
discrimination
in
residence.
77
Figure
SP‐5.
Percentage
of
yes
responses
of
service
providers
who
identified
that
IS
had
reported
experiencing
ethnic
discrimination
in
the
Windsor
community,
at
the
University
of
Windsor,
in
classes,
and/or
in
residence
Academic
Improvements
from
Which
IS
May
Benefit
Figure
SP‐6
shows
the
mean
of
service
provider
responses
identifying
academic
improvements
from
which
IS
may
benefit:
English
writing
skills;
oral
or
spoken
English
skills;
research
skills;
knowledge
of
university
policies;
general
improvement
in
knowledge
base;
understanding
of
University
rules
and
regulations
as
they
apply
to
international
students;
punctuality
in
handling
academic
concerns
and
issues;
greater
financial
support
through
bursaries
and
scholarships;
math
skills;
and,
academic
integrity
knowledge.
Respondents
were
asked
to
rate
each
category
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Almost
never;
2
=
Rarely;
3
=
Sometimes;
4
=
Often;
5
=
Almost
always;
6
=
Not
applicable;
7
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
6
and
7
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SP‐6
shows
that
respondents
noted
IS
may
more
than
“often”
benefit
from
the
following
academic
improvements:
English
writing
skills
(M=
4.176);
oral
or
spoken
English
skills
(M=
4.081);
knowledge
of
university
policies
(M=
4.061);
understanding
of
university
rules
and
regulations
as
they
apply
to
IS
(M=
4.182);
and,
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
79
greater
financial
support
through
bursaries
and
scholarships
(M=
4.097).
Also,
respondents
indicated
that
IS
may
more
than
“sometimes
benefit
from
academic
improvements
in
research
skills
(M=
3.708),
general
improvements
in
knowledge
base
(M=
3.536),
punctuality
in
handling
academic
concerns
and
issues
(M=
3.688),
and,
academic
integrity
knowledge
(M=
3.903).
Finally,
respondents
noted
IS
more
than
“sometimes”
benefit
from
academic
improvement
in
math
skills
(M=
2.789).
Figure
SP‐6.
Academic
improvements
from
which
IS
may
benefit
Social
Improvements
from
Which
IS
May
Benefit
Figure
SP‐7
shows
the
mean
of
service
provider
responses
identifying
social
and
life
skills
improvements
from
which
IS
may
benefit:
communication
skills;
socialization
skills;
and,
spending
more
time
with
students
from
countries
other
than
their
own.
Respondents
were
asked
to
rate
each
category
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Almost
never;
2
=
Rarely;
3
=
Sometimes;
4
=
Often;
5
=
Almost
always;
6
=
Not
applicable;
7
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
6
and
7
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SP‐7
shows
that
respondents
noted
IS
may
more
than
“sometimes”
benefit
from
academic
improvements
in
communication
skills
(M=
3.658);
socialization
skills
(M=
79
3.324);
and,
spending
more
time
with
students
from
countries
other
than
their
own
(M=
3.824).
Figure
SP‐7.
Social
and
life
skills
improvements
from
which
IS
may
benefit
Figure
SP‐8.
Service
provider
rating
of
the
culture
of
the
University
of
Windsor
in
accepting,
welcoming,
involving,
and
providing
services
to
IS
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
81
Culture
of
Office
Figure
SP‐8
shows
the
mean
of
service
provider
rating
of
the
culture
of
the
University
of
Windsor
in
accepting
IS
as
part
of
the
culture
of
the
University,
welcoming
IS
when
they
arrive
at
the
University
of
Windsor,
involving
IS
in
academic
and
social
activities,
and
providing
necessary
services
to
IS.
Respondents
were
asked
to
rate
each
category
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Poor;
2
=
Not
very
good;
3
=
Satisfactory;
4
=
Very
good;
5
=
Excellent;
6
=
Not
applicable;
7
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
6
and
7
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SP‐8
shows
that
respondents
rated
the
culture
of
the
University
of
Windsor
in
accepting
IS
as
part
of
the
culture
of
the
University
(M=
4.311),
welcoming
IS
when
they
arrive
at
the
University
of
Windsor
(M=
4.313),
and
involving
IS
in
academic
and
social
activities
(M=
4.1)
as
above
“very
good.”
However,
respondents
rated
the
culture
of
the
University
of
Windsor
in
providing
necessary
services
to
IS
(M=
3.756)
as
above
“satisfactory.”
Support
Staff
Overall
Experiences
with
IS
Figure
SP‐9
shows
the
mean
of
service
provider
rating
of
their
overall
experiences
with
IS
in
their
office,
in
the
department/faculty,
and
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
Respondents
were
asked
to
rate
each
category
using
the
following
scale:
1
=
Poor;
2
=
Not
very
good;
3
=
Satisfactory;
4
=
Very
good;
5
=
Excellent;
6
=
Not
applicable;
7
=
Don’t
know.
Responses
that
selected
a
rating
value
of
6
and
7
were
excluded
from
the
data
during
processing.
Figure
SP‐9
shows
that
respondents
rated
their
overall
experiences
with
IS
in
their
office
(M=
4.091)
as
above
“very
good”
and
experiences
with
IS
in
the
department/faculty
(M=
3.892),
and
at
the
University
of
Windsor
(M=
3.7)
as
above
“satisfactory.”
Figure
SP‐9.
Service
provider
rating
of
overall
experiences
with
IS
in
office,
in
the
department/faculty,
and
at
the
University
of
Windsor
81
LEARNING
FROM
OURSELVES:
COMMUNITY
MODELS
OF
SUCCESS
There
are
several
departments
who
do
well
to
support
the
needs
of
IS
.
The
backbone
of
these
programs
rests
on
the
value
the
department
places
on
the
contribution
of
IS
toward
a
global
perspective
at
the
University
and
departmental
level.
While
there
are
several
common
threads
in
the
type
or
style
of
support
these
departments
offer
to
IS
in
their
programs,
the
most
prevalent
is
a
multi‐layered
approach.
Students
are
supported
on
a
one‐to‐one
level
over
an
extended
period
of
time.
Part
of
the
support
includes
monitoring
of
student
progress,
building
a
team
effort
that
incorporates
the
IS
within
the
team
framework,
and
referral
and
support
of
IS
to
appropriate
providers.
More
specifically,
successful
example
strategies
include:
transition
courses
that
help
students
adjust
to
a
Western
academic
system,
funding
tutoring
for
students
in
need,
monitoring
student
progress
based
on
attendance
or
course
progression,
fostering
a
structured
environment,
establishing
regular
small‐group
meetings
with
IS,
1‐1
support
for
each
IS,
community
building
activities
(discount
dinner
or
pizza
night),
prompt
referrals
to
various
campus
services
as
needs
arise,
building
a
relationship
with
the
student,
developing
a
learning
plan
with
the
student,
providing
opportunities
for
coaching
and
mentoring
of
IS
by
IS,
connecting
students
with
their
own
community
of
supports,
and
creating
smaller
groups
of
students
to
build
community.
One
department
at
UW
which
receives
a
good
number
of
IS
has
developed
a
successful
strategy
for
retaining
IS
while
at
the
same
time
building
community.
IS
are
grouped
in
houses
of
6‐8
students.
These
houses
have
the
year‐long
structured
support
of
heads‐of‐houses,
students
who
have
attended
the
University
of
Windsor
for
at
least
a
year.
These
heads
of
houses
are
trained
to
support
the
needs
of
incoming
students
in
general.
They
interact
with
the
students
and
monitor
their
progress
to
make
sure
the
student
does
not
fall
through
the
cracks
and
into
isolation.
The
heads
of
house
also
actively
encourage
students
to
participate
in
regular
department
activities
which
tend
to
centre
around
food.
Since
heads
of
house
are
in
close
living
proximity
to
IS
they
are
able
to
actively
encourage
IS
engagement
though
e‐mails,
word‐of‐mouth,
as
well
as
a
friendly
knock
on
the
door
to
remind
them
of
event
or
meetings.
The
heads
of
houses
are
themselves
also
supported
through
regular
heads‐of‐house
meetings
and
a
superior
or
supervisor
they
can
turn
to
in
the
event
they
require
professional
advice.
For
their
efforts,
heads‐of‐house
are
given
a
tuition
credit
as
financial
incentive.
This
department
reports
that
IS
in
these
houses
form
“very
close
bonds,”
even
“life‐
long
friendships”
with
one
another.
The
department
reports
that
IS
respond
well
to
the
structure
in
place
that
supports
their
needs
and
academic
progress.
In
addition,
other
department
noted
that
they
have
made
conscious
efforts
to
adjust
to
the
needs
of
the
incoming
IS.
Noting
a
value
placed
on
a
global
perspective
offered
by
a
multicultural
student
body,
some
faculty
have
consciously
made
adjustments
to
their
programs
to
meet
the
needs
of
a
multicultural
student
body.
For
example;
nursing
has
adopted
a
“uniform
that
is
culturally
appropriate
for
women
who
cover;”
Engineering
has
developed
a
tightly
structured
program
with
the
needs
of
students
and
student
progression
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
83
in
mind
and
has
implemented
a
portion
of
one
faculty
assignment
toward
academic
advising
and
monitoring
of
students
as
they
progress
through
the
program;
ELIP
closely
monitors
student
attendance
and
at
the
onset
absence
from
the
program
schedules
a
meeting
with
the
IS
to
discuss
reasons
and
possible
solutions;
and
ELIP
staff
are
sensitive
and
knowledgeable
of
the
issues
typically
faced
by
international
students.
83
LIMITATIONS
In
the
design
and
execution
of
this
study,
various
attempts
were
made
by
the
researchers
to
avoid
and
predict
possible
points
of
difficulty.
Researchers
collaborated
not
only
with
one
another
but
also
with
a
12
member
working
group
composed
of
various
faculty
and
service
providers
at
the
University
of
Windsor
(Appendix
I)
with
an
interest
in
volunteering
opinions
and
suggestions
for
the
development
and
execution
of
this
study.
Researchers
consulted
with
the
working
group
five
times
throughout
the
year
and
at
various
points
in
the
research.
Primarily,
the
role
of
the
working
group
was
to
act
as
a
consulting
group
of
experts
to
this
study.
Despite
efforts,
the
following
paragraphs
elaborate
on
the
limitations
of
this
study.
The
low
response
rate
summarized
in
Table
L‐1
may
have
led
to
a
sampling
or
selection
bias
as
it
is
often
presumed
that
a
high
response
rate
ensures
greater
accuracy
in
survey
results
(AAPOR,
¶1).
Recent
evidence,
however,
argues
for
“the
least
bias
have
turned
out,
in
some
cases,
to
come
from
surveys
with
less
than
optimal
response
rates”
(AAPOR,
¶5).
Additionally,
low
response
rates
are
increasingly
more
typical
in
survey
research
for
several
cumulative
reasons:
Largely
due
to
increasing
refusals,
response
rates
across
all
modes
of
survey
administration
have
declined,
in
some
cases
precipitously….
At
the
same
time,
studies
that
have
compared
survey
estimates
to
benchmark
data
from
the
U.S.
Census
or
very
large
governmental
sample
surveys
have
also
questioned
the
positive
association
between
response
rates
and
quality.
Furthermore,
a
growing
emphasis
on
total
survey
error
has
caused
methodologists
to
examine
surveys
‐
even
those
with
acceptably
high
response
rates‐‐for
evidence
of
nonresponse
bias.
(AAPOR,
¶4)
Table
L‐1.
Summary
of
each
participant
response
rate
for
the
survey
portion
of
this
study
#
of
Survey
Participants
31
47
22
Participant
Group
Total
#
of
Individuals
Survey
was
Sent
To
Response
Rate
(%)
Faculty
Service
Providers
1180
2.63
1269
3.7
Students
1720
1.28
Researchers
attempted
to
increase
response
rates
of
participants
through
reminder
emails
during
the
period
of
survey
distribution.
In
response
to
the
low
IS
participation
in
the
survey
portion
of
this
research,
a
statistical
analysis
was
not
conducted
on
the
22
student
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
85
responses
to
the
call
for
survey
participation.
Researchers
felt
that
more
robust
information
was
readily
available
from
the
various
focus
group
discussion
and
interviews
with
student
groups
on
campus.
However,
validity
of
data
cannot
be
claimed
given
the
low
response
rates
of
each
survey
participant
group
Once
surveys
participation
had
been
solicited
electronically,
researchers
received
feedback
from
various
faculty
members
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
Largely,
this
feedback
consisted
concerns
that:
1. question(s)
repeated
unnecessarily;
2. negatively
worded
questions
were
tedious
and
redundant;
3. the
rating
scale
for
certain
questions
was
inappropriate
to
accurately
answer
the
stated
question;
4. question
22
asked
that
faculty
identify
their
age
categorized
age
group
by
5
years
except
option
51‐60,
which
by
mistake,
lumped
those
between
the
ages
of
51‐55
and
56‐60
in
the
same
category;
5. some
questions
“did
not
make
sense”
or
were
“poorly
worded;”
and,
6. the
survey
was
in
general
poorly
composed
in
the
sense
that
“the
point
of
reference
is
often
unclear
as
a
result
of
improper
use
of
pronouns.”
Finally,
researchers
found
that
despite
numerous
recruitment
efforts
such
as
the
distribution
of
a
recruitment
poster
through
e‐mail
and
the
International
Student
Center
Facebook
page,
draw
prizes
for
participation,
recruitment
e‐mails,
and
numerous
reminder
e‐mails,
international
student
participation
in
focus
group
discussions
was
low.
Originally,
researchers
intended
to
have
between
6‐8
students
in
each
focus
group
A‐D
discussion.
In
actuality,
IS
participation
in
focus
group
discussions
numbered
as
follows:
Table
L‐2.
Number
of
participants
by
focus
group
Focus
Group
A
B
C
D
#
of
Participants
4
2
0
11
#
Focus
Group
Discussions/Meetings
4
1
0
1
Recognizing
that
participation
in
focus
group
discussions
was
declining,
researchers
decided
to
revise
the
methodology
of
IS
recruitment
for
participation
in
focus
group
discussion.
With
approval
from
the
University
of
Windsor
Research
and
Ethics
Board,
researchers
approached
one
faculty
member
and
one
service
provider,
one
in
Engineering
and
one
in
Business,
to
assist
with
the
recruitment
of
IS
for
participation
in
focus
group
D
discussions.
It
was
through
the
generous
help
of
these
two
individuals
who
volunteered
to
approach
IS
on
behalf
of
the
researcher
that
researchers
were
able
to
forge
a
focus
group
(D)
discussion
between
11
IS
participants.
85
CONCLUSIONS
–Closing
the
Gap
This
report
represents
an
attempt
to
develop
an
understanding
of
the
various
stakeholders
views
at
the
University
of
Windsor
on
the
participation
of
an
increasing
number
of
IS
on
campus
and
what
could
be
done
to
assist
these
stakeholders
as
they
work
to
adjust
to
an
ever
more
diversifying
campus.
As
such,
this
study
has
presented
an
overview
of
the
thoughts
and
feelings
of
these
stakeholders
on
the
activities
and
challenges
they
face
on
a
daily
basis.
The
following
themes
may
be
draws
from
this
research.
First,
in
the
course
of
this
study
it
became
necessary
to
conceptualize
closing
the
gap
between
the
experiences
provided
by
the
University
of
Windsor
and
the
experiences
reported
by
international
students
in
this
study.
Retention
lives
in
the
space
between
these
two
stakeholders
on
campus.
As
such,
researchers
began
to
conceptualize
retention
as
another
word
for
a
home
away
from
home.
In
agreement
with
the
literature
on
retention,
this
study
concludes
that
successful
retention
strategies
offer
multiple
levels
of
formal
and
informal
support
to
meet
the
individual
needs
of
the
IS
on
a
regular
and
one‐on‐one
basis;
these
levels
of
support
actively
encourage
IS
engagement
in
smaller
more
organic
groups
such
as
departments
or
some
other
categorizations
that
work
to
build
a
sense
of
community
at
a
group
and
institutional
level.
Successful
retention
strategies
also
have
a
solid
and
flexible
structure
to
support
students
throughout
their
academic
progression
and
during
periods
of
difficulty.
Acculturation
does
not
imply
changing
the
core
of
who
IS
are
as
individuals,
but
rather
helping
them
adjust
to
and
function
effectively
and
independently
in
a
new
society
and
culture.
The
initial
investment
made
by
an
institution,
its
representatives
and
the
larger
community
in
the
support
of
IS
gives
a
high
return
rate
in
terms
of
decreasing
need
for
support
in
the
culture,
participation
in
the
community
and
positive
feedback
to
other
IS
that
draws
from
good
experiences.
One
faculty
member
observed:
to
acknowledge
that
it
is
difficult
for
them
is
what
students
thank
me
for
in
the
end,
that
you
cared
about
them.
And
the
reciprocation
is
that
they
will
try
their
very
hardest
to
do
their
very
best.
99%
of
the
time,
if
you
show
them
that
you
care
about
them,
and
that
you
are
willing
to
go
the
extra
mile
to
help
them
out,
you
will
get
it
back
a
hundred
times.
Although
systemic
racism
is
not
the
defining
characteristic
of
the
experience
of
most
international
students,
isolated
incidents
of
racism
leaves
not
only
deep
emotional
scars
but
sour
the
experiences
for
international
students
and
may
at
times
be
the
one
thing
that
stands
out
and
is
remembered.
Racism
draws
a
distinction
between
experiences
in
which
IS
thrive
and
an
experiences
in
which
IS
survive
their
academic
years.
Building
a
sense
of
community
and
the
retention
of
IS
go
hand
in
hand
and
work
to
positively
reinforce
one
another.
A
sense
of
community
is
so
desirable
because
it
is
a
feeling
that
the
institution
provides
the
type
of
support
in‐place
of
absent
presence
of
family.
While
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
87
there
are
various
departments
and
sections
of
the
university
that
do
well
to
retain
IS
through
informal
and
formal
supports,
one
faculty
member
reflected
that
an
institutionally
unified
approach
is
required:
It
is
exciting
that
this
project
is
going
on
because
it
shows
that
the
University
really
cares,
but
one
the
other
hand
it
needs
a
kind
of
holistic
approach
from
all
departments
to
address
this
issue.
Possible
approaches
and
suggestions
on
how
to
close
the
gap
between
the
institution
and
IS
are
and
engage
all
stakeholders
is
summarized
in
the
table
below:
Table
C‐1.
Successful
Retention
Strategies
General
Institutional
support
Specific
• IS
councilor
in
department
which
host
large
number
of
international
students;
Creating
a
position
or
carving
out
a
portion
of
an
exciting
position
with
specific
job
description
whose
role
would
involve
the
care
and
attention
to
IS
• Engaging
Canadian
students
to
interact
in
a
larger
capacity
with
IS
and
providing
financial/tuition
incentives
for
these
students
• Training
for
all
faculty
and
staff
(and
domestic
students)
in
cultural
sensitivity,
cultural
differences,
and
culturally
specific
learning
• Increase
the
number
of
supports
available
to
IS
and
distribute
these
supports
throughout
the
academic
year
• Advertise
these
supports
widely,
to
both
IS,
faculty
and
staff
• Provide
a
course
for
IS
that
would
outline
services
and
expectations
(bylaws,
policies,
regulations,
academic
integrity,
health
care,
psychological
services,
the
city
of
Windsor,
food,
entertainment,
religious
locations,
etc.)
• Annual
or
semester
reviews
with
individual
IS
to
discuss
progress
in
program
and
or
other
concerns
• Increase
number
of
financial
supports
through
scholarships,
bursaries,
awards
and
work‐study
opportunities
• Require
that
IS
arrive
for
a
period
of
time
prior
to
the
start
of
classes
• Require
that
late‐arrival
IS
begin
studies
the
following
term
• Ensure
that
recruitment
agencies
provide
accurate
and
complete
information
regarding
the
experience
of
attending
the
University
of
Windsor
(co‐op
opportunities,
living
arrangements
in
residence,
meal
plans,
potential
employment
opportunities
upon
graduation,
etc.)
87
•
•
Offer
proof
reading
and
editing
services
with
assignments
and
papers
to
IS
(with
conscious
effort
toward
academic
integrity
issues)
Increase
the
availability
of
IS
advisors
and
social
space
for
congregating
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
89
APPENDICES
A:
IS
Focus
Group
Discussion
Questions
Individual
How
would
you
describe
your
experiences
at
the
University
of
Windsor?
Why?
What
has
helped
you
succeed
as
a
student?
Which
of
your
needs
are
being
met?
How?
Why?
What
needs
is
the
university
NOT
meeting?
How?
Why?
What
can
be
done?
What
changes
would
you
like
to
see
that
would
be
of
use
or
benefit
to
you?
What
kinds
of
things
are
you
seeing
in
some
classes
(and
not
in
others)
that
are
helpful
to
you
in
your
studies?
How
are
you
adjusting
to
the
new
culture?
University
Experiences
What
expectations
did
you
have
before
arriving
to
the
University
of
Windsor?
Were
these
expectations
met?
Why?
Why
not?
What
are
your
experiences
with
faculty?
With
office
staff?
With
domestic
students?
What
facilities
are
most
useful
to
you?
What
programs
are
most
useful
to
you?
What
people
are
most
useful
to
you?
Are
you
satisfied
with
your
experience
so
far?
Why/Why
not?
Community
What
are
your
experiences
in
the
larger
Windsor
community?
89
B:
IS
Recruitment
E­Mail
Dear
International
Student,
The
office
of
the
Vice‐Provost,
Students
and
International
is
conducting
a
research
study
and
we
need
your
help.
We
are
interested
in
knowing
your
opinions
and
experiences
as
international
students
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
The
purpose
of
this
study
is
to
discover
what
may
be
done
to
positively
influence
the
success
of
international
students
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
The
main
question
this
study
will
try
to
answer
is:
What
direction(s)
should
the
University
of
Windsor
take
to
better
support
international
students?
We
are
looking
for
international
students
(graduate
and
undergraduate)
who
are
18
years
of
age
and
older
to
participate
in
this
study.
Participation
in
this
research
study
is
voluntary.
If
you
volunteer
to
participate
you
will
be
asked
to:
1. Read
a
list
of
questions
which
will
guide
focus
group
discussions;
and,
2. You
will
be
asked
to
participate
in
1
focus
group
discussions
at
a
scheduled
time,
date
and
location.
The
focus
group
discussions
are
confidential
and
will
be
audio
taped.
We
expect
that
discussion
will
last
between
30
and
60
minutes.
Overall,
your
total
length
of
time
for
participation
in
this
study
will
be
between
1‐1
1/2
hours.
The
focus
group
discussion
will
take
place
in
November
2010.
We
will
not
able
to
ensure
you
of
anonymity.
However,
we
will
respect
your
right
to
confidentiality
and
your
name
and
identifying
information
will
be
excluded
from
the
final
report.
Your
responses
will
be
kept
confidential.
The
personal
information
collected
on
this
form
is
collected
under
the
authority
of
The
University
of
Windsor
Act
1962
and
it
is
being
collected
for
the
purpose
determining
what
can
be
done
to
positively
affect
international
student
satisfaction
and
success
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
If
you
have
questions
about
it
collection
or
use
please
contact
Dr.
Clayton
Smith
at
401
Sunset
Ave.,
Windsor,
Ontario
N9B
3P4.
If
you
volunteer
to
participate
in
this
research
study
you
will
have
the
opportunity
to
enter
your
name
in
a
final
draw
at
the
end
of
the
research
project
in
April
2011.
Draw
prizes
are
as
follows:
a. iPad
(first
prize);
b. $500
gift
certificate
to
the
University
of
Windsor
book
store
(2nd
prize);
and
c. $400
gift
certificate
to
University
of
Windsor
book
store(3rd
prize).
If
you
are
interested
in
participating,
think
you
might
be,
or
are
looking
for
some
more
information,
e‐mail
me
at
[email protected]
or
call
me
at
(519)
992‐5201.
Alternatively,
you
may
also
contact
Dr.
Clayton
Smith
at
(519)
253‐3000
ext.
3879
or
at
[email protected]
Regards,
Tanya
Demjanenko
Research
Assistant,
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
Office
of
the
Vice‐Provost,
Student
(Dean
of
Students)
and
International
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
91
C:
IS
Recruitment
Poster
INTERNATIONAL
STUDENTS NEEDED
We need your help! We want to know what can be done to help international students
success at the University of Windsor. We are interested in your experiences as an
international student at the University of Windsor. You must be at least 18 years of
age and a current undergraduate/graduate student. Share your opinion in a focus
group discussion.
Draw prizes at the end of the study include an iPad, a $500 and $400 gift
certificates.
Contact me to get started.
Tanya Demjanenko
Research Assistant, International Student Retention Puzzle
AA
(519) 562-1009
[email protected]
91
D:
Student
Groups
Interview
Questions
The
purpose
of
this
research
is
to
determine
what
can
be
done
to
positively
affect
international
student
retention
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
The
central
concern
of
this
study
is
to
determine
the
direction
or
future
approach
the
University
of
Windsor
should
take
in
order
to
support
international
students.
Your
responses
in
this
study
will
be
used
to
inform
the
findings
of
this
research.
Your
responses
will
be
kept
confidential
and
we
will
not
reveal
your
name
in
the
final
report
of
this
study.
The
questions
I
have
sent
to
you
in
preparation
for
this
interview
are
a
basic
guideline.
I
expect
to
ask
probing
questions
during
the
interview.
Let’s
begin.
1. Tell
me
a
bit
about
how
your
executive/student
group
interacts
with
international
students.
2. What
kind
of
issues
are
international
students
coming
to
you
with?
3. What
problems
are
they
seeking
assistance
with?
4. How
do
you
help
them
cope?
5. What
(kinds
of
services/programs)
are
student
responding
to
positively?
Thank
you
for
your
time
and
participation
in
this
interview.
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
93
E:
Service
Provider
Recruitment
E­Mail
Dear
Staff
Member,
The
office
of
the
Vice‐Provost,
Students
and
International
is
conducting
a
research
study.
We
are
interested
in
your
opinion
and
experience
as
a
service
provider
to
international
students
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
The
purpose
of
this
study
is
to
determine
what
can
be
done
to
positively
affect
international
student
retention
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
The
central
concern
of
this
study
is
to
determine
the
direction
or
future
approach
the
University
of
Windsor
should
take
in
supporting
international
students.
This
research
project
has
two
primary
objectives:
1. To
identify
the
factors
that
contribute
to
attrition
of
international
students
to
determine
what
we
might
do
to
improve
the
success
and
persistence
of
international
students
academically,
through
support
initiatives
and
in
our
student
recruitment
program;
and
2. To
develop
a
predictive
model
to
identify
international
students
who
are
likely
leavers
so
that
our
limited
resources
can
be
effectively
deployed
to
improve
the
persistence
of
individual
international
students.
We
are
looking
for
current
service
providers
of
the
University
of
Windsor
who
are
18
years
of
age
or
older
to
complete
a
20‐30
minute
confidential
on‐line
survey,
which
will
ask
you
to
share
your
thoughts,
reflections
and
experiences
with
international
student
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
Your
participation
in
this
research
study
is
voluntary.
To
take
part
in
this
study,
please
click
on
the
following
hyperlink
by
no
later
than
December
20th,
2010:
International
Student
Retention
Survey
Link.
The
final
report
outlining
the
finding
of
this
study
will
not
identify
or
make
known
the
personal
information
collected
in
this
research
project.
Your
responses
will
be
kept
confidential.
The
personal
information
collected
on
this
form
is
collected
under
the
authority
of
The
University
of
Windsor
Act
1962
and
it
is
being
collected
for
the
purpose
of
determining
what
can
be
done
to
positively
affect
international
student
satisfaction
and
success
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
If
you
are
looking
for
more
information,
contact
me
at
[email protected]
or
at
(519)
992‐5201.
Alternatively,
you
may
also
contact
Dr.
Clayton
Smith
at
(519)
253‐3000
ext.
3879
or
at
[email protected].
Sincerely,
Tanya
Demjanenko
Dr.
Clayton
Smith
Research
Assistant,
Solving
the
Researcher,
Solving
the
International
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
Student
Retention
Puzzle
Office
of
the
Vice‐Provost,
Students
and
Vice‐Provost,
Students
and
International
International
93
F:
Faculty
Recruitment
E­Mail
Dear
Faculty,
The
office
of
the
Vice‐Provost,
Students
and
International
is
conducting
a
research
study.
We
are
interested
in
your
opinion
and
experience
as
faculty
to
international
students
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
The
purpose
of
this
study
is
to
determine
what
can
be
done
to
positively
affect
international
student
retention
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
The
central
concern
of
this
study
is
to
determine
the
direction
or
future
approach
the
University
of
Windsor
should
take
in
supporting
international
students.
This
research
project
has
two
primary
objectives:
1. To
identify
the
factors
that
contribute
to
attrition
of
international
students
to
determine
what
we
might
do
to
improve
the
success
and
persistence
of
international
students
academically,
through
support
initiatives
and
in
our
student
recruitment
program;
and
2. To
develop
a
predictive
model
to
identify
international
students
who
are
likely
leavers
so
that
our
limited
resources
can
be
effectively
deployed
to
improve
the
persistence
of
individual
international
students.
We
are
looking
for
current
faculty
members
of
the
University
of
Windsor
who
are
18
years
of
age
or
older
to
participate
in
a
confidential,
30‐60
minute
audio
taped
interview.
During
the
interview
we
will
ask
you
to
share
your
thoughts,
reflections
and
experiences
with
international
student
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
In
preparation
for
the
interview,
you
will
be
given
a
list
of
questions
that
will
guide
the
interview
discussion.
Your
participation
in
this
research
study
is
voluntary.
The
final
report
outlining
the
finding
of
this
study
will
not
identify
or
make
known
the
names
of
participants
in
this
research
project.
Your
responses
will
be
kept
confidential.
The
personal
information
collected
on
this
form
is
collected
under
the
authority
of
The
University
of
Windsor
Act
1962
and
it
is
being
collected
for
the
purpose
of
determining
what
can
be
done
to
positively
affect
international
student
satisfaction
and
success
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
If
you
are
looking
for
more
information,
contact
me
at
[email protected]
or
at
(519)
992‐5201.
Alternatively,
you
may
also
contact
Dr.
Clayton
Smith
at
(519)
253‐3000
ext.
3879or
[email protected].
Sincerely,
Tanya
Demjanenko
Dr.
Clayton
Smith
Research
Assistant,
Solving
the
Researcher,
Solving
the
International
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
Student
Retention
Puzzle
Office
of
the
Vice‐Provost,
Students
and
Vice‐Provost,
Students
and
International
International
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
95
G:
Faculty
Interview
Questions
The
purpose
of
this
research
is
to
determine
what
can
be
done
to
positively
affect
international
student
retention
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
The
central
concern
of
this
study
is
to
determine
the
direction
or
future
approach
the
University
of
Windsor
should
take
in
order
to
support
international
students.
Your
responses
in
this
study
will
be
used
to
inform
the
findings
of
this
research.
Your
responses
will
be
kept
confidential
and
we
will
not
reveal
your
name
in
the
final
report
of
this
study.
The
questions
I
have
sent
to
you
in
preparation
for
this
interview
are
a
basic
guideline.
I
expect
to
ask
probing
questions
during
the
interview.
Let’s
begin.
6. Tell
me
a
bit
about
how
you
interact
with
international
students
in
your
teaching.
7. What
kind
of
issues
are
international
students
coming
to
you
with?
8. What
problems
are
they
seeking
assistance
with?
9. How
do
you
help
them
cope?
10. What
kinds
of
services/programs
are
student
responding
to
positively?
Thank
you
for
your
time
and
participation
in
this
interview.
95
H:
Service
Provider
Interview
Questions
The
purpose
of
this
research
is
to
determine
what
can
be
done
to
positively
affect
international
student
retention
at
the
University
of
Windsor.
The
central
concern
of
this
study
is
to
determine
the
direction
or
future
approach
the
University
of
Windsor
should
take
in
order
to
support
international
students.
Your
responses
in
this
study
will
be
used
to
inform
the
findings
of
this
research.
Your
responses
will
be
kept
confidential
and
we
will
not
reveal
your
name
in
the
final
report
of
this
study.
The
questions
I
have
sent
to
you
in
preparation
for
this
interview
are
a
basic
guideline.
I
expect
to
ask
probing
questions
during
the
interview.
Let’s
begin.
1. Tell
me
a
bit
about
how
your
office
interacts
with
international
students.
2. What
kind
of
issues
are
international
students
coming
to
you
with?
3. What
problems
are
they
seeking
assistance
with?
4. How
do
you
help
them
cope?
5. What
kinds
of
services/programs
are
student
responding
to
positively?
Thank
you
for
your
time
and
participation
in
this
interview.
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
97
I:
Working
Group
Members
List
Member
Professional
Capacity
Brooke
White
Student
Development
and
Support
Roy
Amore
Faculty
of
Arts
and
Social
Science
Nihar
Biswas
Faculty
of
Engineering
Ejaz
Ahmed
Faculty
of
Science
Vicky
Paraschak
Faculty
of
Human
Kinetics
Kim
Amore
International
Student
Centre
Erika
Kustra
Centre
for
Teaching
and
Learning
Jennie
Atkins
English
Language
Improvement
Program
Karen
Benzinger
Centre
for
Career
Education
Diane
Rawlings
Residence
Services
Stacey
Marion
Centre
for
Executive
and
Professional
Education
Laine
McGarragle
Lulua
Mala
UWSA
President
Volunteer
International
Student
Assistance
Saqib
Sachani
International
Student
Society
Anoop
Gupta
Graduate
Student
Bernarda
Doctor
Tanya
Demjanenko
Clayton
Smith
Organization
of
Part‐Time
University
Students
(OPUS)
Researcher,
Office
of
the
Vice‐Provost
Students
(Dean
of
Students)
and
International
Researcher,
Vice‐Provost
Students
(Dean
of
Students)
and
International
97
REFERENCES
American
Association
for
Public
Opinion
Research
–AAPOR.
(2011).
Response
rate:
An
overview.
Retrieved
June
12,
2011,
from
http://www.aapor.org/Response_Rates_An_Overview1.htm
Andrade,
M.
S.
(2009).
The
value
of
a
first‐year
seminar:
International
students’
insights
in
retrospect.
Journal
of
College
Student
Retention,
10(4),
483‐506.
Barron,
P.
Gourlay,
L.
J.,
&
Gannon‐Leary,
P.
(2010).
International
students
in
the
higher
education
classroom:
Initial
findings
from
staff
at
two
post‐92
universities
in
the
UK.
Journal
of
Further
and
Higher
Education,
34(4),
475‐489.
Beane,
B.
A.
(1985).
A
model
for
foreign
student
retention
and
attrition:
A
case
study
of
Sunny‐Buffalo.
Dissertation
Abstracts
International.
Boyer,
S.
P.
&
Sedlacek,
W.
E.
(1988).
Noncognitive
predictors
of
academic
success
for
international
students:
A
longitudinal
study.
Journal
of
College
Student
Development,
29,
218‐223.
Byrd,
P.
(1991).
Issues
in
the
recruitment
and
retention
of
international
students
by
academic
programs
in
the
United
States
(ERIC
Higher
Education
Report).
Carter,
K.
&
Xu,
Y.
(2007).
Addressing
the
hidden
dimension
in
nursing
education:
Promoting
cultural
competence.
Nurse
Educator,
32(4),
149‐153.
Conrad,
M.
&
Morris,
K.
(2010).
Shifting
from
retention
rates
to
retention
risk:
An
alternative
approach
for
managing
institutional
student
retention
performance.
Toronto:
Higher
Education
Quality
Council
of
Ontario.
Cubilli,
J.,
Sanchez,
J.
and
Cervino,
J.
(2006).
International
students'
decision‐making
process.
International
Journal
of
Educational
Management,
20(2),
101‐115.
Fitzgerald,
V.
F.
(1998).
The
identification
of
problems
in
academic
and
social
support
systems
by
international
students.
Dissertation
Abstracts
International.
(UMI
No.
9834459)
Hansen,
M.
E.
(1993).
An
orientation
and
leadership
training
handbook
for
international
students
(Beacon
College
Handbook).
Edison,
NJ:
Middlesex
County
College.
Mallinckrodt,
B.,
&
Sedlacek,
W.
E.
(1987).
NASPA
Journal,
24(3),
28‐32.
Solving
the
International
Student
Retention
Puzzle
99
Rice,
K.
G.,
Choi,
C.,
Zhang,
Y.,
Villega,
J.,
Ye,
H.
J.,
Anderson,
D.,
Nesic,
A.,
Bigler,
M.
(2009).
International
student
perspectives
on
graduate
advising
relationships.
Journal
of
Counseling
Psychology,
56(3),
376‐391.
Sandeen,
A.
(2004).
Educating
the
whole
student:
The
growing
academic
importance
of
student
affairs.
Change,
May/June,
28‐33.
Simpson,
K.
&
Tan,
W.
(2009).
A
home
away
from
home?
Chinese
student
evaluations
of
an
overseas
study
experience.
Journal
of
Studies
in
International
Education,
13(1),
5‐21.
Tas,
M.
(2004).
Promoting
diversity:
Recruitment,
selection,
orientation,
and
retention
of
international
students.
Dissertation
Abstracts
International.
Tompson,
H.
B.
&
Tompson,
G.
H.
(1996).
Confronting
diversity
issues
in
the
classroom
with
strategies
to
improve
satisfaction
and
retention
of
international
students
[Electronic
version].
Journal
of
Education
for
Business,
72(1).
Van
Nelson,
C.,
Nelson
J.
C.,
&
Malone,
B.
G.
(2004).
Predicting
success
of
international
graduate
students
in
an
American
university.
College
and
University
Journal,
80(1),
19‐
27.
Wait,
I.
W.,
&
Gressel,
J.
W.
(2009).
Relationship
between
TOEFL
score
and
academic
success
for
international
students.
Journal
of
Engineering
Education,
98(4),
389‐398.
Zhang,
Z.
&
Zhou,
G.
(2010).
Understanding
Chinese
international
students
at
a
Canadian
university:
Perspectives,
expectations
and
experiences.
In
J.
Ryan
(Ed.),
China’s
higher
education
reform
and
internationalization
(pp.
123‐133).
New
York,
NY:
Routledge.
99