I

70-15,031
FORD, Charles Christopher, 1941A CASE STUDY OF THE ADAPTATIONAL PATTERNS OF
ASIAN GRADUATE STUDENTS IN EDUCATION AT
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY.
Michigan State University, Ph.D., 1969
Education, higher

University Microfilms, A XEROXCompany, Ann Arbor, Michigan

A CASE STUDY OP THE ADAPTATIONAL PATTERNS OF
ASIAN GRADUATE STUDENTS IN EDUCATION AT
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
By
Charles Christopher Ford

A THESIS
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
College of Education
19.69

ABSTRACT
A CASE STUDY OF THE ADAPTATIONAL PATTERNS OF
ASIAN GRADUATE STUDENTS IN EDUCATION AT
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
by Charles Christopher Ford
The purpose of the study was to investigate how
graduate students from other nations (specifically, the
developing nations of the Asian region) react to their
academic environments in the United States.

This case

study involved fifteen students from the countries of the
Middle East, South Asia, and Southeast Asia who were pur­
suing advanced degrees at Michigan State University's
College of Education during the 1969 academic year.
A typology of three adaptational styles was developed
on the basis of intensive interviews with these students
over a two month period.
These were:

Style I, Negative-anxious - Those

students who were highly and openly dissatisfied over their
educational experiences here and were highly critical of
the faculty and University for these conditions;

Charles Christopher Ford
Style II, Negative-accommodating - Those students
who were generally dissatisfied with their educational
experiences here but who tended to accept these conditions
that they perceived as being inevitable;
Style III, Positive - Those students who were
generally satisifed with their educational experiences here
(two sub-categories emerged here:

a) those who were satis­

fied because they felt that they could readily use that
which they were learning here, and b) those satisfied be­
cause they intended to remain in the United States).
Three of these students were categorized within
Style I, two were between Styles I and II, five were in
Style II, and five were judged to be in Style III.
The major variables (determinants) of the adapta­
tional styles that emerged in this study were a) the students
perception of the "relevance” of that which he was learning
here (eleven of the students had strong reservations about
the relevance of what they were learning to their own career
objectives),b) whether or not they had a job waiting for
them in their home country, (those with jobs waiting tended
to adapt negatively), c) their interaction patterns with
members of the faculty (those with satisfactory interaction
patterns tended to adapt positively^,.:d) and their inter­
action patterns with the graduate students (with results
similar to c>■

Charles Christopher Ford
On the basis of these results,four hypotheses
for further investigation were suggested.
1.

If the student has waiting for him a job that
he wants to return to (especially one involving
planning or development) he is more likely to
view as low the relevance of his educational
experiences in this country and to adapt in a
negative way to the university environment.

2.

If the student doesn't have a job waiting
him that he wants to return to he is more
to view as moderate or high the relevance
that which he is learning and to adapt in
a mixed or positive pattern.

3.

The greater their opportunity for intense and
meaningful interaction with faculty and other
graduate students (especially encounters related
to academic concerns which involve their own
career goals) the lesser the tendency for these
students to react to the college environment in
a "negative-anxious" style.

4.

The greater their opportunity for gaining access
to an "internal system" of the College (e.g., via
assistantships)*the lesser the tendency for these
students to react to their educational experiences
here in a "negative-anxious" style.

for
apt
of
either'

A detailed recommendation for an interdisciplinary
seminar focused on the problems of education in developing
nations was set forth.

The seminar would serve as a focal

point of interaction for graduate students in education (and
other fields) and faculty members who have a serious interest
in this area.

The major purpose of such a seminar would be

to serve as a resource and consultation base where disserta­
tion efforts could be generated, supported, and reinforced.

ACKNOWLE DGMENTS
To Dr. Harry L. Case, my thesis advisor, I extend
my great appreciation.

Dr. Case has been instrumental, with

his warm and continuing support, in guiding this study from
beginning to end.
I wish to thank Dr. Cole S. Brembeck, my academic
advisor, for his support and guidance in connection with
this study and throughout my stay at Michigan State Univer­
sity.
A special debt of gratitude is due to Dr. Iwao
Ishino, Chairman of the Department of Anthropology, who
gave unstintingly of his time and effort in this endeavor
after agreeing to join this thesis committee as a lastminute replacement.

I am thankful to Dr. Alfred B. Hudson,

who was in Indonesia doing field work while this study was
in progress but whose earlier advice as a member of my
academic committee and in the planning stages of this study
is greatly appreciated.

Appreciation is extended also to

Dr. Judith E. Henderson, the fourth member of my academic
committee.
Finally, to my wife Karen, without whose patience
and understanding this would not have been possible, I
extend my most heartfelt thanks and appreciation.
•

•

TABLE OP CONTENTS
Chapter
I. INTRODUCTION ..................................

1

BACKGROUND ...................................
STATEMENT OP THE P R O B L E M ....................
METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES ..................

1
14
20

II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE.................

28

S U M M A R Y ......................................

41

ANALYSIS OF D A T A .............................

43

ADAPTATIONAL STYLES ........................
R E L E V A N C E ...................................
FACTORS AFFECTING ADAP TATI ONALPATTERNS . . .
S U M M A R Y .....................................

43
53
58
76

SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION.......................

79

IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER R E S E A R C H ..........
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
AT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY..............
RECOMMENDATIONS...............................

84
86
90

APPENDIX
....................................
BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................

94
98

III.

IV.

*

*

in

i

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
This is a case study of fifteen graduate students
from the Asian region studying at Michigan State University's
College of Education.
is on the questions:

The focus of this exploratory study
(1)

how do students from other

nations perceive the relevance of their education and
training at an American University and (2) how do these
students adapt to the environments of the College and the
University?

This first chapter includes a discussion and

review of some of the issues involved; a statement of the
problem being explored; and an explanation of the methods
and procedures that have been followed in carrying out this
particular case study.
BACKGROUND
Scope of the Study
Since the end of World War II the subject of the
foreign student in the United States has been a source of
increasing interest and concern for both the educator and
the social scientist alike.

In 1952, when the Social Science

Research Council brought together a group of distinguished

2
social scientists to form the Committee on Cross-Cultural
Education to begin a series of intensive studies on this
subject, there were approximately 30,000 foreign students
in the United States.

Now, seventeen years later, that

number has almost quadrupled to a figure approaching 120,000.
Of these, approximately fifty per cent are from the Asian
region (including the Middle East) with another twenty-five
per cent coming from Africa and Latin America,
1968).

(Open Doors,

At Michigan State University, the setting for this

particular study, the foreign student population has in­
creased from 247 in 1952 to over 1,200 today with more than
700 of these students coming from the Asian region.

In the

College of Education of this University there were 55 stu­
dents from what can be termed "developing countries" as of
September 1968 with 43 of these being from the Asian Region.^
It is these students (or, more precisely, those still enrolled
as of June 1969) that are the subject of this study.
Cross-Cultural Education as a Research Area
The first publication in conjunction with the abovementioned Committee on Cross-Cultural Education was a pamph­
let by Guy S. Metraux entitled, Exchange of Persons;
Evolution of Cross-Cultural Education.

The

At the time of this

publication in 1952 Metraux, in his summary, could little
^See the Foreign Student Directory - Michigan State
University (limited circulation) 1968.

3
more than regret the lack of research on cross-cultural
learning and he concluded that " . . .

cross-cultural edu­

cation is much more difficult to analyze and understand in
all its implications than are social institutions which
are generally shaped by the majority of the members of a
society."

(p. 23.)

Since 1952 there has been a virtual flood of research
and articles on cross-cultural education and on the foreign
student in particular.

In an article entitled "Can the

Developing Nations Afford American Higher Education," (1967)
William Overton reported that upon reviewing the literature
on international education exchange through 1967 he found
some 200 items on the foreign student alone (p. 428).

He

reports, however, that few of these actually dealt with crosscultural education in terms of the application of learnings
across cultures.

In fact, the bulk of the studies that have

been done on the foreign student in the United States have
involved non-academic questions centering on such issues as
"felt national status" of the foreign student; his attitudes
towards the United States; his social relations in the States;
and his general adjustment to American cultural patterns.
Those studies which have focused on academic issues have
usually aimed at comparing the academic success of foreign
students with their American counterparts, or on such related
issues as their language problems and admission difficulties.

4
There have been very few attempts to assess the academic
experiences of the foreign student (and especially of those
from the developing nations as a distinct category) in
terms of the actual or perceived relevance of what they are
learning in the United States to what they will be doing
once they return to their own country, or in terms of their
patterns of adaptation to the environment of the American
university.
It is commonly presumed that most foreign students
will return to the society and culture of their origin and
there utilize what they have learned in the United States.
Evidence suggests, however, that this presumption is often
wrong on two counts:

first, many of the foreign students

educated in this country do not go back (e.g., of the 390
Koreans who earned doctorate degrees in the United States,
2

only 64 have returned) and, second, those that do return often
have considerable difficulty in utilizing many of those skills
and understandings which they have acquired within a socialpolitical-economic milieu which is so very different from
that of their own society.
Both of these situations hinge, to an extent, on the
issue of relevance and the related issue of transfer.
this regard one might ask:

In

How relevant, to begin with, is

the bulk of the education and training being given to students
2

See Nuri Eren, "Supply, Demand, and the Brain Drain,"
Saturday Review, August 2, 1969, p. 10.

5
from foreign and especially developing countries in those
colleges and universities of this country that are exten­
sively engaged in the education and training of these stu­
dents; and, to what extent have these colleges and univer­
sities made positive efforts to assist these students in
the task of transference— of recognizing the application of
their learnings in this country to the conditions which
they will be confronting in their home nation?
That there is a high correlation between the issues
of relevance of learnings in this country (and/or the
ability to transfer these learnings to one's home country)
with incidents of professional or occupational maladjust­
ment once these students return home as well as the contin­
uing tendency for many foreign students to pursue their
professional careers in the United States would seem to be
a safe assumption.

If and to the extent that these assump­

tions are true an answer of "no" might be suggested for Over
ton's question:

"Can the developing nations afford American

higher education?"
The University and the Foreign Student:
Opportunity__________

Challenge and

The question of the appropriateness of education
and training from the perspective of the foreign student in
an American university was the subject of a report put for­
ward by an International Study Group of the Association of

6
State Universities and Land Grant Colleges in 1961.

The

position then taken was that a modification of educational
offerings was urgent in order to prepare foreign students
for constructive work upon their return home.

The report

stated that, by and large, the study programs then avail­
able to foreign students were rooted in traditional Ameri­
can patterns and reflected social, economic, and scientific
needs in a highly industrialized economy with large-scale
business, organized labor, a free-market, and a democratic
government that are far different from the economic patterns
in their homelands.

The group asserted that the knowledges

and skills acquired in this country must somehow be adapted
for application in a social and economic environment quite
different from that of the United States.

This study group

was apparently suggesting a pattern of education for foreign
students involving a combined program of technical training
and liberal arts education which "will have to transcend
both the present limited aims of technical assistance as the
government defines it, and also the smug departmental isolation that often dominates the university world."

3

In another sense, the challenge of the foreign stu­
dent to the American university, and especially to its pro­
fessional schools, can be viewed as an opportunity— an
3

Report of International Study Group II, Steps Needed
to Improve or Develop Programs to Meet the Needs of Foreign
Students and Trainees, Centennial Convocation, Association
of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges, November 1961,
p. 346.

7
opportunity for the schools to re-examine the nature of
the training that is offered and also the generalizability
of the concepts on which this training is founded in the
light of the American University's ever-expanding inter­
national dimension.
Confronted in this situation with having to ask just
how cross-culturally valid most of our practices about
education and learning really are, the professional school
finds itself having to re-examine and re-validate many of
its own principles and practices.

The dilemma as well as

the opportunity which this gives rise to was well-expressed
by Kenneth Benne in an address to an interprofessional
conference on the education of foreign students.

Benne was

contemplating the nature of the teaching and learning processes
appropriate to developing effective professional change agents
when he observed:
Bringing into conscious focus the use of university
resources in training people to effect radical change
leads us to look at teaching and learning processes
in a different light. Students from other countries,
especially those where social change is a dramatic
necessity and where these governments and ours are
interested in effecting changes, dramatize issues
which we have only partly faced in our own country
and in the training of our own professionals. In a
sense, we are interested to know how universities can
assume responsibility, not only for the original
acquisition of learning, but for the effective trans­
fer and application of that learning in situations
of practice. Our professional training institutions
have assumed that responsibility in only limited
degree, probably because we could, with some assurance,
assume that others would take up the job of the

8
continuing growth of professionally trained persons
and their adaptation to the hospital or social agency
or school setting in which they worked.
We cannot assume this in the case of many foreign
students, so their prescence among us dramatizes the
problem of the extent of university responsibilities
in the full cycle of learning, which includes the
transfer and application of learnings by students
in a given setting, as well as to help them develop
the knowledges, skills, and technologies for which
we have ordinarily assumed responsibility?
(Sanders:
86 .)

The Foreign Student and the University - the Search for
Relevance
These questions which Benne suggests relative to the
challenges posed by the foreign student at American univer­
sities are of basic concern, but the more immediate concern
of this study is the challenge to the foreign student him­
self as he confronts the issue of personal relevance within
his graduate work in professional education.
A useful distinction that might be used in dis­
cussing this question of learning from the student's per­
spective is that of the difference between reception learn­
ing and meaningful learning that has been made by David
Ausubel.

The distinction, briefly, is as follows:

Reception learning is that which is presented to the
student in relatively final form; he is required to
internalize it only for the purpose of the immediate
situation— the academic course.
Meaningful learning is that which is used when a problem arises which is novel or unique to the specified

9
learning presented; he is not only required to inter­
nalize it in the learning situation, but he must also
use it in some other situation.
(Spencer: 14.)
It can probably be safely said that foreign students
in American universities have primarily been required to
perform the former task-reception learning.

To do this

the student must often learn a second language, receptively
learn a subject matter field in that language, and then
emit appropriate verbal characteristics of behavior in
English and thereby indicate that he has learned the
appropriate content and quality of the assigned subject.
The second step, that of providing for "meaningful learning,"
is a problem in all educational encounters but particularly
where the foreign student is involved.

Generally speaking,

his purpose in learning the material is not to obtain a
satisfactory American grade point average, but to take this
knowledge back to his country and operate with it.

Thus

receptively learned material must be put into practice or
the reception has been a waste of time.

He must, there­

fore, not only receive it internally and disgorge it in
this second language but, to be effective, he must also
internalize it in his native language and then be respon­
sible for somehow accommodating this new material to his
native cultural patterns and concepts.

His showing of this

knowledge in the United States is purely American— an exer­
cise in fitting it into the professional world for which the

10
United States curriculum was established.

It is often not

possible for him to demonstrate the applied nature of this
knowledge within the cultural contexts of his own country.
In the first place the student's instructor probably will
not ask him to do so; and secondly, even if he should, it
seems unlikely that the average instructor would know the
appropriate application of the material to the student's
culture himself.
In the hard sciences and professions, such as engi­
neering, chemistry, and medicine, this problem of transfer
is diminished to a large extent, but it does remain at the
forefront in the softer curricular fields and this includes
most aspects of education.

For the student from a devel­

oping nation studying education in this country we might
ask, for example:

How transferable are principles of

counselling and guidance as currently practiced in the United
States to the student from Thailand?

How adaptable is know­

ledge about educational administration in the United States,
or Michigan, to the Indonesian student who will be returning
to the central ministry of education in Jakarta?

And, how

adaptable is an understanding of the history of American
education to the student from Turkey who will be trying to
help chart the development of education in his country?
That there are potential elements of transfer and
adaptation in each of the examples cited is not to be denied;

11
the point to be made here is that this task of transfer
is left largely to the student.

He is given little assist­

ance in the application of knowledge learned here to his
own environment and furthermore# the evaluation procedure,
which should be a device to assist the student in applying
his knowledge# also falls short as far as the foreign stu­
dent is concerned.

What, it might be asked, is the use of

determining the academic success of the foreign student in
his understanding, for example, the parochiaid issue in
Michigan if he will never in his own work utilize such
knowledge?

If application is a criterion, then perhaps

application and transfer need to be taught directly.

It

hardly seems that the university can expect it to happen
automatically.
And not only should the evaluation procedures within
the classroom setting be questioned and re-examined from
this perspective, but also the evaluation or requirements
established for the degree itself.

At Michigan State Uni­

versity the question of the general comprehensive examina­
tions in education for all doctoral candidates comes to mind.
The usefulness of these examinations from the perspective
of the American student is currently an issue of much debate
within that College.

It might be suggested here that the

arguments against their use as evaluation devices could be
multiplied four-fold where the student from a developing

12
nation is concerned.

The most cogent argument in this

respect might be that to the degree that the foreign stu­
dent is successful on these exams might be an indication
of the time that he had to devote to studying principles,
issues, ar.d perhaps peculiarities of American education—
time which may have been better spent studying education
from the vantage point of the needs and issues within his
own country.

It might be further suggested that these

examinations and similar criteria become doubly dysfunc­
tional if they cause the foreign student to re-appraise
his professional situation and career prospects along the
line that "I've become very expert in matters of American
education but less so in terms of the conditions in my own
country, so perhaps I would be better off staying in the
United States."

If and when this should happen the American

university and colleges of education in particular must
re-appraise their commitment to "internationalism" in terms
of how, in reality, they are actually fostering international
understanding, international co-operation, and international
development.
It would be wrong, however, to overgeneralize this
situation and suggest that these problems of relevance and
transfer are of equal concern to all foreign students or
even to all students from developing nations.

Whereas one

foreign student might be dismayed and frustrated by the
seeming irrelevance of having to study American educational

13
practices which are far removed from the realities of his
home country, another student from the same country or a
neighboring country might be quite content with the same
subject matter.

There are many complex factors which con­

tribute to a student's satisfaction or dissatisfaction
with his educational experiences in this country.

These

include his personal and professional goals; his degree of
attachment to his own country; the occupational opportuni­
ties at the professional level in his country; the length
of his sojourn in the United States, and others.
This
of relevance

study, then, will attempt to examine the issues
and transfer as perceived by a group of Asian

graduate students in the field of professional education.
With the above mentioned variables in mind, an attempt will
be made to discern for which of these students, and to what
extent, the question of relevance is indeed an issue as it
is defined here.
adaptation:

Closely related to this is the question of

How do these students adapt to the environment

of the American university and what relationship, if any,
seems to exist between these patterns of adaptation and
their attitudes toward the relevance of their educational
experiences in this setting.
The next section further clarifies the problem and
further defines the terms relevance, adaptation, and envir­
onment as they are used in this study.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
Stated simply and specifically, this study is an
attempt to provide:
An assessment of the professional preparation
of graduate students from the Asian region at
Michigan State University's College of Education
in terms of:
a)

How do they view the relevance of that which
they are learning?

b)

How do they adapt to the environments of the
University and the College of Education?

Definition of Terms:

Within the context of this study the

terms relevance, adaptation, and environment should be
interpreted as follows:
Relevance - a question of "fit"; of "how good" is the
fit between what an individual perceives as his career
and professional goal'g and what the environment is
able to provide to help fulfill these needs.
Adaptation - the process of striving to fulfill needs
(acnieve relevance) by either: 1) changing one's
needs so that they can be met by the available en­
vironment; 2) changing the environment so that it
can meet the individual's needs; or 3) leaving the
environment for one which is more hospitable to
one's needs.
Environment - those parts of a total system of
components that are selectively perceived by an
individual; each individual therefore defines
his own environment.
The foreign student has three environments with which
he must cope in his adaptive processes:
United States, and his home country.

the University, the

It is assumed that

how he adapts to and within each of these will depend to a
large extent on his quest for relevance— of what his

14

15
personal and career needs are and how he expects to ful­
fill these needs.

For example, if the student should

determine that his career need is to become a professional
educator in the United States (due perhaps to a lack of
adequate employment opportunities in his home country) he
can be expected to interpret and to adapt quite differently
to the environment of the University and of the United
States than the student who is committed to a professional
career within his own country.

This latter student would

tend to define his home country as his prime environment
and his needs and his search for relevance would be shaped
accordingly.

It is assumed here that the adaptation process-

in terms of his educational experiences in this country— is
more complex and demanding to this student who wants to
return home than to the one who is defining his needs in
terms of a career in the United States, and thus it is with
the former student that this study is primarily concerned.
As students from what have been commonly classified
as being among the developing nations of the world, many
of these future educators can be expected to be involved
in work which is markedly different from that which their
American contemporaries will be engaged in.

Most of those

students that do return with advanced degrees can be expected
to be thrust into positions of leadership where they will be
responsible for sharing in the planning and implementation

16
of educational programs which are unique to their own
nation and tempered by its particular level of develop­
ment.

Such roles and responsibilities will require skills

and understandings quite unlike those of the American edu­
cator in either his role as teacher or as administrator.
How do such foreign graduate students proceed to acquire
these understandings and skills in an American university
setting which is more geared to the needs of the American
professional educator?
It seems that the foreign student in this situation
might have to ask these questions of himself:
Can the material and skills that I am learning
here be related to the conditions in my own
country— are they relevant?
How do I transfer that which appears to have some
relevance to the conditions in my own country—
Which elements do we use? Which do we discard?
How do we introduce them?
If I cannot see any relevance, or if I cannot
see how I can use these understandings and
skills in my home country, why am I staying
here? At which point he may further ask:
- Should I quit?
- Should I stay merely for the sake of having
a degree?
- Should I forget about "relevance" for my own
country and cast my lot instead with a
professional career in the United States?
- Should I "stick it out" because I am expected
to "stick it out" and accept the notion that
an American university is not and cannot be
expected to concern itself with individual
problems of "relevance."

17
In a general sense, then, the purpose of this
study is to try and determine if and to what extent
questions of this sort are being asked and, more impor­
tantly, how they are being answered by these students.

Of

further interest are the various and complex factors which
determine and shape these questions and responses.

These

include variables related to his home country, his family,
his personality, and his prospects for occupational secur­
ity and satisfaction.
Purpose of the Study
Stated more specifically, the purpose of this study
will be tos
A.

Estimate the extent to which the graduate stu­
dents from the Asian region at Michigan State
University's College of Education are concerned
about the relevance of their education and
training here in the light of their career
interests and goals.

B.

Characterize and describe the adaptational
styles of these students within the environments
of the University and the College of Education
in relation to:
1.

their perception of the relevance of their
educational experiences here;

2.

and such other variables as:
- their region of origin;
- the cultural distance between their
country and the United States;
- their country's level of development;

18
- their age and family status;
- whether or not they have a job waiting
at home;
- their interaction patterns in the
United States.
C.

Suggest possible hypotheses for further investi­
gation based upon which of the variables under
consideration seem to be most clearly related
to the various adaptational styles that these
students tend to follow.

D.

Suggest possible implications for the nature and
content of program offerings to these students
by the College of Education on the basis of the
patterns which emerge in this exploratory study.

Significance of the Problem
The issues being explored here are of a qualitative
nature— that of the "quality" (i.e., meaningful, useful,
relevant) of the education and training which is being
provided in our professional schools of education to graduate
students from developing nations.

The significance and

ramifications of these issues were well expressed by former
Secretary of State Dean Rusk in an address before the National
Conference on International Social and Economic Development
when he remarked:
I should like to suggest to all of us, whether in govern­
ment or in private fields, that when we are talking
about education, and particularly when we are talking
about bringing young people from other countries to
the United States for training, that the emphasis had
better be on the quality of the job, rather than the
number of those who might somehow be involved.
Two halves don't make a whole in that matter. Two illprepared or half-prepared young people going back to

19
their country cannot make the contribution which one
well-prepared person can make. And if you have six
young people who come here for training, who go back
disappointed or frustrated, or with a sense of
failure, there may be six young people who had
better not have come in the first place.
And so I would urge both those of us in Government
and those in private organizations to take this bus­
iness of playing with the lives of people with the
greatest of seriousness. And if we involve young
people from abroad in this process of education by
any effort of ours, we do so determined to do it
right, whatever the numbers involved.
(Mimeo: 1961.)
How many of the foreign students being trained in
this nation's colleges of education are going home
" . . . half-prepared . . . disappointed . . . frustrated,
or with a sense of failure?"

What is the extent of these

attitudes and this situation among the students from
developing nations currently studying at Michigan State
University's College of Education?
way they do?

Why do they feel the

What can be done about the deficiencies or

situations which seem to contribute to these conditions?
Certainly these questions are less easy to quantify
and less easy to get answers to than the questions that
have been posed in much of the research centering upon the
academic experiences of the foreign student in this country.
Rather than asking "how well they are doing" in terms of
their grade point averages or their ability to speak English,
this study will in essence be asking "how well is the College
doing" in terms of providing these students with what is to
them a meaningful and relevant educational experience.

20
Hopefully, then, this study might reveal to this
College and to educators elsewhere who are involved with
and interested in the professional training of students
from developing countries some first hand information as
to how some of these students feel about their educational
experiences in this particular setting and why they feel
the way they do.

It is also hoped that from within this

study some suggestions or implications might emerge as to
how the academic programs for these students might be
altered or improved so as to be brought more in line with
their personal needs and career orientations.
METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES
Nature of the Study
This is an exploratory study.

Not enough is known

about the subject being investigated here— perceptions of
relevance and patterns of adaptation of foreign students— to
allow for the application of sophisticated and tested mea­
sures of investigation.

In the absence of sufficient know­

ledge in this area relatively coarse instruments of investi­
gation must be resorted to in order to identify the parame­
ters of the problem.

It is anticipated that at a later

point questionnaires might be developed which would permit
a wider ranging survey-type study.

However, because of

the present methodological deficiencies and limitations,

21
the decision was made to use a case method approach for
this initial exploration.
Population
The population of this study was limited to graduate
students from the Asian region in the field of education at
Michigan State University.

A total of fifteen students

were involved and they were categorized as originating from
the Middle East (including Turkey, Iran, and Saudi Arabia);
South Asia (India and Pakistan); and Southeast Asia (includ­
ing Indonesia, Taiwan, and Thailand). Eleven of these were
studying for doctoral degrees with the rest working at the
masters level.

Only students who had been enrolled at

Michigan State for at least nine months were included in
the sample.

Originally the plan of the study called for

including all of the graduate students from "developing"
nations who had been here for a nine month period.

The

records of the College of Education indicated that 55 such
students had been enrolled during this past year; however
this number was greatly reduced by the time that this study
got under way, due mainly to graduation.

Because very few

of the remaining students in the desired study population
were from Africa or Latin America it was decided to limit
the study to those students from the Asian region who were
still on campus.

However, the notion that these students

22
are all from what are generally regarded as "developing"
nations remained a vital consideration in this study and
as perhaps the only real measure of commonality.
Interviewing
Because of the small size of the population and
because of the exploratory nature of the study, the major
research technique employed was the focused interview.

Also,

because of the sensitivity of this research area, it was
felt that the written questionnaire would have been an
inadequate device at this early stage of investigation.

It

is doubtful that a questionnaire format would have elicited
accurate or meaningful responses to such sensitive question
areas as:

career goals, interaction with faculty and other

students and attitudes towards course offerings.
Generally speaking, the focused interview technique
that was used in this study can be characterized as a com­
promise between the rigidity of the directed interview and
the looseness of the non-directive method.

Robert Merton

has attributed the following characteristics to the focused
interview approach:

9) it takes place with persons known

to have been involved in a particular situation as either
observers or as participators; 2) it refers to situations
which have been analyzed prior to the interview; 3) it
proceeds on the basis of an interview guide which outlines

23
the major areas of inquiry; 4) it is focused on the sub­
stantive experiences— attitudes and emotional responses—
regarding the particular concrete situation under study.”
(541-542.)
An interview schedule of approximately sixty items
was developed to serve as a guide in the interview process.
The majority of the items were open-ended and consequently
the interview schedule served more as a checking device,
to see that pertinent areas were covered, than as a structure
or format for the interview session.

In cases where the

respondent was reluctant to "open-up” it was necessary to
ask virtually every item individually.

On the other hand,

there were a few instances in which only three or four
questions had to be asked directly by the interviewer before
the respondent had addressed himself in one way or another
to each of the areas under investigation.

The interviews

ranged in time from one hour and fifteen minutes up to five
hours, with the average interview lasting approximately two
and one-half hours.

A copy of the interview schedule can

be found in the appendix of this study.
Pilot Interviews
Because of the small size of the available popula­
tion only two interviews were conducted on a pilot basis to
test for respondent reaction and to give the interviewer

24
(myself) an opportunity for practice with this technique.
One Nigerian and one Indian student cooperated with the
author in this early stage and both gave valuable advice
and suggestions which were incorporated into the inter­
view schedule and which aided the author throughout the
study.

The Indian student was also a part of 'the final

study population.
Interview Procedure
The interviews were conducted over a one month
period— usually on week days and never more than one a day.
The subjects were not notified by letter in advance.

At

the beginning of each week I would call about five of the
students, identify myself as a fellow graduate student in
the College of Education, explain the nature of my study and
the fact that I was doing it as a dissertation, and ask them
if they would be willing to sit down and talk with me for
a couple of hours at a time and at a place of their conveni­
ence .
Everyone that I was able to contact agreed to the
interview.

Only two interviews were held in the same place.

Usually the student would suggest that I come to his home
or room for the interview.

I found this flexibility in

terms of the place of the interview to be an important factor
in giving the respondent an opportunity to suggest a setting

25
which would be familiar to him and in which he would feel
most comfortable.
The interviews were recorded openly and in longhand.
When I found that I had difficulty in getting down in
writing all that I wanted, I would say such things as "I
like the way you expressed that; would you repeat it so
that I can be sure to get it all down just as you said it?"
This and similar phrases seemed to work quite effectively.
A number of the subjects were known to the author
through common classes and through contacts previous to the
study.

Generally, I found that these students were much

more open in their responses and much less likely to be
suspicious of my motives or intent in carrying out the
study.

I could not, however, discern any significant differ

ences or tendencies on the part of the respondent to report
a positive or negative reaction to his education experiences
here on the basis of his familiarity with me alone.

I did

find, however, that those who seemed most dissatisfied with
their experiences here tended to have the most to say and
this is perhaps not very surprising in view of the general
nature of the investigation.
Limitations of the Study
There are always limitations in a case study of
this nature.

The most regrettable one in this particular

instance has to be the sma^l size of the population; the

26
reasons for which have been discussed already.

One com­

pensation for the small sample size, however, was the fact
that it allowed the researcher to go into more depth with
the individual subjects than would have been the case if
the sample had been considerably larger.
The second major limitation was the absence of a
more refined instrumentation than what the focused-interview approach was able to provide by itself.

Hopefully,

such instruments can be developed in the future and it is
also hoped that this exploratory study will suggest elements
which can be incorporated into such a questionnaire or some
other similar device.

The author was reassured, however,

about the advisability of limiting himself to informal
interviews at this early stage of investigation by the
Indonesian student who remarked at the close of a four hour
interview:
I appreciate that you are using a qualitative rather
than a quantitative approach— this is one of the
reasons that I agreed to be interviewed. I am not
a number but a human. A human is not a thing but
a potential. I consider my rationality to be but a
part of my being; I wanted you to see the rest of me.
ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS
In Chapter I the primary concern has been to provide back­
ground, define the problem and its importance, and to des­
cribe the methodology and procedures that have been utilized
in carrying out this study.

27
Chapter II is a survey of the literature related to the
foreign student in the United States.

Special attention

is given to previous studies which have dealt with acade­
mic adjustment and with the interaction patterns of foreign
students in American universities as well as to the small
amount of literature which relates to the issues of relevance
and adaptation as they apply to the foreign student studying
in this country.
Chapter III is the presentation and interpretation of the
interview results.

The subject's responses are categorized

according to the major variables being explored and are
presented in some detail in order to preserve the richness
of the data and to give the reader an opportunity to make
interpretations of his own.
Chapter IV is a summary of the findings accompanied with
some tentative conclusions/ hypotheses/ and suggestions
for further investigation.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
There has been a vast amount of literature pro­
duced on the subject of the foreign student in the United
States but very little of this has dealt directly with
the questions of "relevance" and "adaptation" from the
perspective of the foreign student himself.

There are a

number of studies, however, which do deal with the related
issues of student interaction, personal goals, and acade­
mic adjustment which are also considered in this study.
These, along with some of the recognized major contribu­
tions to the literature on foreign students, will be re­
viewed in this chapter.
Of all the works that have been done on the foreign
student in this country there are a few that stand forth
as landmarks in this particular area of cross-cultural studies
and which are also of direct relevance to this investigation.
Among these are DuBois' survey study, Foreign Students and
Higher Education in the United States, Morris *, The Two Way
Mirror, Useem and Useem's, Western Educated Man in India,
and the individual nationality studies of Lambert and
28

29
Bressler on Indian students, Beals and Humphrey on Mexican
students, and Davidson and Sewell on Scandinavian students.
The DuBois study (1956) dealt with the social and
psychological factors related to foreign student adjust­
ment.

Among other things, DuBois postulated four stages

of adjustment that the foreign student goes through during
his sojourn.

These are:

1)

The spectator phase - which is early in the stu­
d e n t s sojourn and is characterized by psycholo­
gical detachment from the new experience; a time
when the student still has a tourist attitude of
enjoying the new environment without having to
meet many of its demands.

2)

The adaptive phase - characterized by active involve­
ment in the problem of adjustment, when the student
must master the skills required by the host culture
in general and by the academic environment in parti­
cular. It is the phase of the most acute strain and
stress, of unresolved conflict when the so-called
culture shock may be most acute.

3)

The coming-to-terms-stage - in which an equilibrium
is reached in the struggle for adjustment. Regard­
less of whether attitudes toward the host culture
and the self are positive, negative, or objective,
this stage is characterized by relative stability.

4)

The pre-departure stage - which concludes the
sojourn; at this stagethe expectations of return
to the home country dominate the student's feel­
ings and attitudes. The tenor of this period
again may be negative or positive, depending on
the nature of the adjustment and of life expecta­
tions upon return.
(pp. 66-77.)
It was DuBois* conclusion that the extent to which

the foreign visitor manages to enhance his self-esteem is
the most important single factor in determining the emotional

30
texture, and frequently the academic success, of the
sojourn.

She identifies several major factors which are

damaging to self-esteem:

1) lack of communication; 2)

unfavorable attitude of the host culture toward the stu­
dent's country; 3) inability to achieve expected educa­
tional goals; 4) inconsistency of experience, and 5)
financial stringencies (pp. 114-121).
The stages of adjustment hypothesis that were
suggested by DuBois have come to be referred to as the
"U curve phenomenon" because of its peak, depression, peak
pattern.

Most of the studies that have been done on the

adjustment patterns of foreign students allude to and
support the notion:: of a U curve process in the stages of
adjustment.

Gullahorn and Gullahorn (1963) have carried

this one step further by suggesting an extension of the U
curve to a "W curve," since the cycle of adjustment in the
host country is followed by a cycle of readjustment upon the
foreign student's return home (pp. 33-47).
The U curve phenomenon (and the W curve, its natural
extension) has also been well documented by anthropologists,
Peace Corps workers and others who have worked in another
culture and it follows the "culture shock syndrome" that
has been described by Foster.(1962).

This study does not

address itself to this phenomenon because it was not possible
to build within it a time dimension.

However, if the U

31
curve phenomenon is an accurate description of psychologi­
cal adaptation and adjustment it would seem that most of
the students who comprised the population of this study
would be at either the "coming-to-terms phase" or the "pre­
departure phase" since only students who had been here for
at least nine months were included.

It is also questionable

as to whether the U curve phenomenon is still operable in
instances where a student is making his second sojourn in
this country as was the case in a number of instances in
this study.
Morris (1960) approached the question of foreign
student adjustment through the perspective of "felt national
status."

The investigation was designed to determine how

much the image of their native countries, which they believed
Americans held, influenced foreign students in their reac­
tions to their American experiences.

This study was under­

taken on the basis of exploratory work which strongly sug­
gested that the status and self-esteem problems characteris­
tic of students from "under-developed" countries made them
relatively prone to ambivalent and therefore unstable atti­
tudes of global acceptance or rejection.

Morris1 data

refined and corrected this impression as he concluded that
the fact of low accorded national status alone did not make
any significant difference in attitudes about the United
States or their general experiences here.

Several of the

32
items used by Morris were also used in this study and the
reactions which they evoked seem to support the conclusions
of Morris.
Western Educated Man in India;

A Study of his Social

Role and Influence (1955) is a highly regarded study by the
Useem's on the effects of foreign study on the character of
the individual Indian, the uses of educational training
acquired overseas in India and the effect of foreign educa­
tion on cross-cultural relations.

They found that although

professional improvement was the primary objective of the
students, fewer than ten per cent of the returned students
were being used in the fieLd for which they were trained,
and that their attempts to introduce Western technology
were limited.

They also made a number of observations and

recommendations which bear directly upon the focus of this
study; among these are:
a.

If transfer of Western technical knowledge to India
is the objective, individuals must be selected who
are not only capable of absorbing the education of
the West but who will also have the opportunity
to apply this knowledge after their return . . .^
there must be a sustaining social structure within
which he can fit.
(p. 189.)

b.

As to type of training . . . if the foreign student
is older and is either on leave from a position or
knows exactly where he will be employed upon his
return, then specialized training, oriented toward
the cultivation of specific skills applicable to
the Indian position he'll be returning to are
called for. . . .
. . . if the foreign
begun his career . .
places emphasis upon
ciples and practical
(p. 209.)

student is younger or has not
. then a broad training which
methodology, underlying prin­
experience is to be preferred,

33
c.

. . . Indian students who are well trained in
methodology and principles are better prepared
to work in India than those not so trained.
They are able to strip away the cultural patterns
surrounding their acquired skills and to apply
them to Indian conditions. Courses that provide
a body of facts about American conditions and
those which instruct the student to collect in
the library comparable facts about India offer
far less that is useful than do courses in
methods and principles.
(p. 210.)
Lambert and Bressler in Indian Students on an

American Campus (1956), maintained that the major deter­
minants of Indian students' experiences in the United States
were in India; that it was the cultural characteristics of
the student himself which determine the way he interprets
his experiences in the United States.

They argued that if

these students are to learn to understand Americans they
must be encouraged to participate in, rather than just
observe American life.

Among their conclusions were:

1) the

American visit does not become explicit until the student
returns to his home country and resumes his life in his own
occupation, family and community; 2) although easing the
cultural adjustment in coming in contact with a new culture
was a worthy humanitarian goal, there was no substantial
evidence that ease or difficulty of physical adjustment, com­
fort, or discomfort was substantially related to subsequent
adjustment here in the United States or after return to India.
The authors also concluded that some of the traditional

34
applied courses in engineering, architecture, and agricul­
ture can and should be refashioned to mord adequately
meet the unique needs of students from underdeveloped
countries.
Beals and Humphrey's No Frontier to Learnings

The

Mexican Student in the United States (1957) focused on the
formative socio-cultural influences on the Mexican student
in his own country, the aspects of American culture that
influence him in the United States and the ways in which his
U. S. experience affects his life after he returns to
Mexico.

It was found that nearly all the Mexican students

who come to the United States are atypical .of Mexicans:
their ideologies were found to be very similar to those of
American students.

Few, however, seem to consider remaining

in the United States.

Among the authors' findings were:

1) there is a strong indication that the returned students
are substantially different from other Mexicans and that
these differences are partly related to the duration of the
student's stay in this country, their age at the time, and
the degree to which they participate in American life; 2) that
study in the United States seems to be most productive for
students well-trained in their field; and 3) that students
who were not well-trained do not play as important roles
nor gain the prestige they expected on their return home.

35
Davidsen and Sewell, Scandinavian Students on an
American Campus (1961) carried out a study of the academic
and social adjustment of forty Scandinavian students at
the University of Wisconsin.

The results of this study

suggest that:
Participation in American life leads to favorable
impressions of the United States and that the
more favorable the impressions, the more one
participates; good academic adjustment not only
stimulates participation, but also is in some
measure the result of participation, and both, in
turn, result in more favorable impressions of America
and a greater willingness to see American culture
traits adopted in the home country. Finally all of
these reciprocal influences are reflected in a high
level of satisfaction with the sojourn experience.
(p. 164.)
While each of these studies contributes to the
general theory and knowledge related to the adjustment and
attitude formation of foreign students in the United States,
they do not direct themselves explicitly to the issues which
are more germane to this particular study.

M. Brewster

Smith, who was serving as coordinator of the Committee on
Cross-Ciiittural Education which sponsored several of the above
studies, reviewed the literature which that group and others
had produced on the subject and pointed out the gap in
this area as he concluded-,- among other things, that there
was a need for further research into "problems of academic,
professional/ and technical learning and transfer of
learning. . . ."

36
. . . These were only touched on unsystema­
tically in the studies sponsored by the Committee
on Cross-Cultural Education. No research outside
the committee's program has dealt with them, in spite
of their practical experience, close relationship
to program goals, and theoretical interest. Under
what sojourn conditions is learning achieved most
effectively, in a form most transferable to return
conditions, and what variable conditions of the
return situation facilitate and impede transfer?
(1956:61.)
Smith made this statement in 1956 and it appears
that there has been very little actual research since then
that is directed at closing this information gap.

There

have been a few efforts approaching this direction and
these include some recent doctoral dissertations as well
as the publication <5f a conference held in 1961 entitled
The Professional Education of Students from Other Lands;
but by and large the issues of relevance, adaptation and
transfer— the central considerations in this study— con­
tinue to be ignored by researchers.

Richard Spencer (1967)

reviewed the literature on the academic performance of
foreign students and placed the question of measuring and
evaluating foreign student performance in its proper per­
spective :
Since we expect them (foreign students) to succeed in
Western-oriented culture, in educational institutions
designed to train Americans for success in American
culture, insist upon Western attitude and socializa­
tion changes, we are in fact saying that the foreign
students are considered successful to the degree that
they become more like us. To operate in their home
cultures, upon return, the foreign students are placed
in an anxiety provoking situation. To act professionally

37
(i.e., according to what they learned in the United
States), they must act as Americans. They cannot
separate out the content material from the cultural
overtones in which it was learned. Their content
fields are American and their application of it is
an American concept in and of itself. They have,
in effect, been trained to be acultured in their
own culture. They are neither fish nor foul; not
quite American and not quite native. Have we done
them justice?
(p. 18.)
There are, however, a few studies which have been completed,
along with one major one now under way at the University
of Wisconsin, which do deal at least indirectly with the
/

questions that Spencer raises and with some of the issues
being explored in this study.
At Indiana University, Shinouda (1966) completed a
follow-up study of 75 doctoral graduates from Southeast
Asia and the Middle East who had received their degrees in
education from Indiana.

Among the major findings of this

study, which was based upon written responses to mailed
questionnaires, were that:
a.

The recipients identified course work, disserta­
tion projects, and student-professor relationships
(in that order) as the most valuable aspects of
the doctoral program. Other valuable aspects
mentioned were: 1) educational conferences,
2) field trips, 3) teaching experiences, 4)
periodic visitations to other institutions.

b.

The majority of the respondents expressed
agreement with the following issues: 1) the
School of Education provides too few informal
professional and social contacts among graduate
students, 2) the doctoral program should place
more emphasis upon training in research methods,

38
3) doctoral programs for foreign students
should be more flexible in keeping with
various national needs, 4) doctoral candi­
dates preparing for college teaching should
have more experience in observing and parti­
cipating in the college teaching-learning sit­
uation.
(p. 203.)
Shinouda reports that the graduates in his sample
strongly disagreed on the item that there should be two
sets of standards, one for Americans and one for foreign
students.

Shinouda concluded that:

1) the professional

outcome of the educational experience of these students
was positive and the education acquired was regarded by
them as contributing to their professional, social and
personal development and (but) 2) there is a need for
certain revisions in the programs along the lines on which
agreement was expressed by the graduates (p. 207).
In a study carried out at Stanford University, Selby
and Woods (1966) interviewed a group of 18 non-European
foreign students and used questionnaires with a larger
sample to investigate the foreign students' perception of
the "internal system" of the university.
find out:

They wanted to

which demands of the system impinge upon him most

closely; how does he organize his efforts to meet the demands
of the system; what price does he have to pay because of his
adaptive patterns, and how decisive an influence do the
exigencies of the academic milieu at the university have
upon the entire process of foreign student adjustment?

Their

39
findings, which have been influential in the development
of the present study, were:
. . . the student from a non-European culture in a
high-pressure university finds himself utterly pre­
occupied with his academic problems to the exclusion
of most other considerations. The structure of
academic life precludes social activities of a leisurely
kind as well as wide social contact with American stu­
dents . Student morale rises and falls with the academic
seasons and, in fact, the academic pressures pre-empt
his attention and energy. He perceives the demands of
the academic system, which he sees in all their rigor,
but he is prevented from arriving at an accommodation
to these demands because he is denied the "inside
knowledge" of what his American counterparts are doing.
His contact with the social structure of the university's
foreign and American students, with community repre­
sentatives and with faculty, intensify the demands that
are placed on him, strengthen his motivation for success,
and intensify his drive to attain this success through
literal interpretation of the "rules" as stated by
the faculty and university administration.
(p. 153.)
At the University of Wisconsin Wilkening (1965)
carried out a study entitled Factors Associated with Adjust­
ment of Foreign Students Studying Extension Education at
Selected Land Grant Institutions which surveyed 80 students
at five universities (including Michigan State).

Both ques­

tionnaires and interviews were used in this study in which
Wilkening found that:
93% of the respondents indicated that they were
satisfied with the progress they were making to­
ward their stated objectives for their study tour
but that they were almost unanimous in their desire
for more practical experience and a better under­
standing of extension activities at the county level.
(p. 196.)
Currently, at Wisconsin, an investigation entitled
"The Foreign Student Adaptation Project" is under way.

It

40
is an interdisciplinary venture headed by Milton H. Miller,
M. D.

The major objective of this project is:

to study cross-cultural adaptation of foreign
students who have come to the United States, and
to examine the relationship of these patterns to
the attainment of educational, professional and
personal goals, areas of stress, and processes of
personality and attitude change. It is assumed
that by identifying the cultural, social and
psychological concomitants of adaptational styles,
that standardized measures and techniques for
prediction and preventive intervention can be
developed.
(mimeo, undated.)
The objectives and tentative outline of the Wiscon­
sin project suggest that it will be covering many of the
same questions that this case study is concerned with and
that, hopefully, it will produce some sophisticated measures
for examining these areas.
The study or report which is perhaps most closely
related to the topic of this dissertation is a paper pre­
sented by Robert Beck of the University of Minnesota entitled
"Professional Training in Education for Foreign Students in
the United States."

This paper was presented at the previously

referred to conference on the professional education of
foreign students (Sanders, 1963).

This study was based upon

questionnaires and interviews with then current as well as
formerly enrolled students at Minnesota's College of Educa­
tion.

Beck focused on the problems of learning for foreign

students from the perspective of what he defines as cultural
distance.

His general conclusion was that:

41
The greater the social and cultural distance between
what is taken for granted in the home setting and
what is taken for granted in the host culture and
society, the more assistance is required to permit
the foreign student the objectivity (conditions for
rationality) requisite for detached, analytical
judgment.
(p. 106.)
Beck also presents a lengthy discussion of the
academic problems of the foreign student as seen by their
professors and as perceived by themselves.

He concludes

that while different approaches are often required where
the foreign student is concerned, these should not lead
to nor be interpreted as a form of double standards but
rather as a posture of flexibility.

Among Beck's observa­

tions and recommendations are:
a.

Foreign students perform better when speaking
or writing of conditions in their own country..

b.

Upper division undergraduate courses should be
given graduate credits to foreign students who
are deficient in these areas.

c.

Courses in history of education— American and
Western World— allow the foreign student to
better envision where their own schools fit
in such a continuum.

d.

Comparative education courses are valuable to
the foreign student in broadening his perspective
and in pointing out the difference between centra­
lized and decentralized systems and selective and
non-selective public education.
(pp» 126-127.)
SUMMARY
In spite of the vast amount of literature that has

been produced on the foreign student in the United States,

42
there continues to be a noticeable lack of solid research
relating to the relevance (actual or perceived) of their
training and education in this country or on their patterns
of adaptation within their academic environments here.
Among the studies which have treated these topics
in at least an indirect way are those by DuBois, who postu­
lated a stage of adjustment hypothesis? the Useems' on the
role and influences of the returned student in India; and
a number of studies sponsored by the Social Science Research
Council (including those by Beals and Humphrey, Lambert and
Bressler, and Morris).
More recently these topics were given extensive
treatment at a conference related to the professional train­
ing of foreign students, the results of which were edited
by Irwin Sanders.

And currently underway at the University

of Wisconsin is a major study which deals directly with the
subject of the adaptational styles of foreign students.

CHAPTER III
ANALYSIS OF DATA
This chapter includes a discussion, and examples,
of three different adaptational styles which seemed to be
characteristic of the students in this study.

Some of the

forces which tend to shape or determine these styles are
discussed? these includes

the student's perception of the

relevance of his educational experiences here in this country;
whether or not he has a job waiting for him at home? his
family status; and his patterns of interaction with members
of the faculty and with other graduate students studying in
his academic area.
ADAPTATIONAL STYLES
The interviews held with these fifteen graduate stu­
dents from the Asian region revealed a variety of behavior
and attitude patterns on their part related directly to the
educational settings of this College and University.

While

the patterns each of these individuals exhibits is unique
and therefore would— to be totally accurate— require fifteen
separate descriptions, there does seem to be enough similarity
43

44
between the adaptation patterns of some of these students
to allow for the development of a typology of three differ
ent adaptational styles (in terms of their orientations
toward their academic environment here).
A Typology of Adaptational Styles
The three classifications that have been used here
to delimit these adaptational styles are negative-anxious,
negative-accommodating, and positive.

As was indicated

above, and as will become obvious later, most, if not all,
of these students displayed mixed patterns of adaptation to
their environments here.

However, because these mixes were

not usually evenly proportioned— that is, because they tend
to exhibit either more negative or more positive patterns as
the case may be— it has been possible to develop some tenta­
tive groupings based upon the directions in which these indi
vidual students tend to orient themselves.

The character­

istics of these three types of adaptational styles are:
Style I - Negative-anxious: Students in this category
tend to be highly dissatisfied with their experi­
ences within the academic environment here. This
category includes those students who have decided
to quit or who are constantly on the border between
staying and leaving, as well as those who are con­
tinuing on despite a great deal of personal unhap­
piness and dissatisfaction over their experiences
here. These students seem to be highly critical
of the content of their academic programs and of
their relationships (or lack of) with members of
the faculty. They tend to be very highly oriented

45
toward their own nations and express grave con­
cern over the utility and application to their
home setting of what they are learning in this
country.
Style II - Negative-accommodating; Those students most
characteristic of this adaptational style share
many of the attitudes and concerns of the students
who are highly negative (Style I). The difference
is that they are less apt to place the blame for
these conditions of which they are critical on the
University or the faculty but rather tend to accept
these conditions as being among the realities of
life. They adapt accordingly by trying to make
the best of the situation as they perceive it.
They also (as in Style I) tend to be highly oriented
towards and concerned about their own country and
its development (and their future roles within
that process) but seem generally less apt to
condemn the College or the University for not
providing more experiences geared directly towards
these interests. They are earnest about their
quest for relevance but tend to remain flexible,
if not submissive, when frustrated in their search.
Style III - Positive; The students in this category
expressed a relatively high degree of satisfaction
with their academic experiences here. There are
actually two groups within this category:
a.

those students who believe that what they
are learning here is readily transferable
to their home country. It seems that this
group is more likely to include those stu­
dents who are returning to college teaching
positions in the same area that they have
been studying here.

b.

those students who, for one reason or an­
other, have decided to remain in the United
States and to pursue their professional
careers within the environment of this
country and who therefore are less inclined
to challenge the contents of their education
here in terms of its applicability to their
country of origin.

46
The fifteen students in this study seem to fall
into the three adaptational style categories that have
been delimited here as follows:
Student Number

Adaptational Style
1
1-2
1-2
2
3
3
3
3
2
2
1
3
3
2
1

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

(a-b)
(b)
(b)
(b)

(a)
(a)

As this chart indicates, three of the above students
revealed patterns of adaptation which did not lend themselves
neatly to a single categorization.

Students 2 and 3 were

both negative-anxious and yet at the same time displayed
consistent attitudes of a willingness to accommodate.

Student

number 5 displayed elements of both a and b within Style III.
Overall, of the fifteen students, nine have been classified
as belonging to Styles I and II (or a combination thereof)
which are representative of negative (dissatisfied) adapta­
tional patterns.

Only six of these students in this study

fell within Style III (positive).

47
Examples of Adaptational Styles
Below are some of the comments made by these students
which led to and which are illustrative of this classifica­
tion system.
Style I - Negative-Anxious (including combination of I and II).
A student from the Middle East who was here as part
of a Michigan State University-United States Government
project to assist his country's Ministry of Education in
developing its research and planning capabilities was the
most extreme case in this category:
It was obvious that they were just not prepared for
us here. Our instructions had defined the work that
we would be doing when we returned, but it is obvious
that the courses here and the degree requirements just
don*t match up . . . It appears that the only path to
follow is to just do what is offered here, regardless
of your needs, your instructions, or your future job. . .
But this is not for me— I quit. (1)
At another point in the interview this same student
elaborated on these concerns and also expressed his opinion
as to where he thought the responsibility for doing some­
thing about correcting these deficiencies lay:
I wonder if the theoretical information that we are
receiving here will really help me . . . My job will
be decision-making, evaluation, introducing change;
to learn how to make the best out of investments in
education . . . Isn't there some way that I could be
prepared along these lines? Well I think that there
The students are identified by number only in order
to preserve anonymity. Reference is made, however, to the
student's region of origin and occasionally to his home
country itself in instances where there were several students
from the same country.

48
is and that it is the Project's responsibility to set
this up for me— to plan a program for me . . . I am
not interested in getting a degree but in being able
to do a job when I get home. Here all they seem to
think of is credits and degrees. I don't want to be
an incompetent with a degree; I want to be competent—
degree or notl
(1)
A Southeast Asian student who wanted to quit but who was
"sticking it out" commented:
I feel as though I'd like to quit everyday. I can't
wait to get home. I know that sometimes Indians and
Filipinos don't want to go back and therefore they
feel very comfortable staying here. . . . But I also
understand that the responsibility that the foreign
student accepts is that he will study, and that if
I quit I will lose face.
(11)
At another point, on being asked whether or not he
would want to return to this country to study a second
time this student replied:
No, I wouldn't come here again if I had the chance.
I'm sure that ninety-nine per cent would say yes,
but this depends on their background— who and what
they were in their own country. As for me, I was
much happier at home than I have been here.
(11)
And a second student student from the Middle East
who was categorized as I - II was highly dismayed that his
e xpect a tions h a d n o t been met.

He commented:

My instructions call for me to get training and courses
related to every aspect of educational planning . . . but
I am not getting this, at least not more than five per
cent. I am taking the same courses as the others (Ameri­
can students) in what might be called classical American
education; there has been no emphasis related to my own
field.
There have been some courses in education which I've
taken that are supposed to be close— international

49
education courses, you know, but they have been a
waste of time for me. I would have been better off
reading a few articles on economic development or
something of the sort.
(3)
This same student commented about his colleague
who had left upon completion of his master's, rather than
continuing on for the doctorate as his program called for:
We told ____

(who left) m a n y times t h a t he shoul d

suffer it out and get his Ph.D. He says that they have
not been honest but I cannot blame them. If I were
in the position of the faculty I would probably do
the same thing— they are very busy and it is impossible
for them to give 100 per cent of their effort to this
one project.

. . . When

______ gets h o m e t h e y w i l l think

that he is crazy for giving up this opportunity.

(3)

Another student who was also considered to be a
"borderline" case between adaptational Styles I and II, had
his frustrations but he had his hopes also as he looked
forward to the return from overseas of a faculty member
whom he had heard was a specialist in his area:
Within the comparative education courses I am dis­
appointed at the lack of an economic orientation.
I believe that in terms of development that an
understanding of economics is of first priority.
My main interest is in educational planning. I
want to know the basic strategies and the under­
lying theories. I understand that there are some
people within the department who are strong in this
area but they haven't been here this past year so I
haven't had a chance to do any coursework with
them. (2)
Style II - Negative-Accommodating
Representative of Style II, which had four students,
are the below comments which reflect the belief that the

50
responsibility for meeting individual career needs and
concerns rests more with the individual himself than with
the host institution.
A student from Southeast Asia commented:
I am very interested in books on change and strate­
gies of economic planning. I want courses that deal
with this but I am not getting it . . . I cannot say
that I am disappointed. X believe it is important
but what does MSU think . . . I am only one student.

(14)

The comments of this student from South Asia reflects
the frustration and feeling of loneliness which seems char­
acteristic of this group:
I am mainly interested in the sociology of develop­
ment but I have found that if I want to pursue this
here that I must do so on my own. The sociology of
education courses here do not deal with this, my
chairman is interested in school finances . . . all
I have to satisfy my own interests is the library . . .
I have been unable to find a professor who is interested
in these things and who is willing to help me . . .
without the library I ’d be lost.
(10)
The other student in this group from South Asia
reveals the aggressiveness of his own quest for relevance
as well as an understanding on his part of the dilemmas
facing some of his colleagues in the following two comments:
I found something in every course— even those which
others say are a waste of time . . . Every person can
find something and it is the individuals responsibility
to make use of every opportunity. One must ask ques­
tions but most foreign students feel shy— they are
always afraid that they will be ridiculed or that
the U. S. student will consider that he is silly.
(9)
I think that the United States should prevent the
foreign student from settling here? they must be
sent home where they are needed . . . but then you
really can't blame them. In India or Pakistan a Ph.D.
might get $150 a month and what does he get here?
(9)

51
The student from the Middle East in this group
commented:
The foreign student must always view what he learns
from his point of view: the relevance gap is his
responsibility. Whenever the professor is talking
I must interpret from my point of view. I don't
care if I get a C-, as long as I get something of
value out of my efforts.
(4)
And the accommodating stance of the members of
this group is reflected in the following remarks by the
Southeast-Afeian student in this group:
Only those who really belong in this country can
judge . . . I don't belong here so X don't feel
that I can really say much about education in this
country. I can learn from the worst course; even
if you hate me I will learn from you.
Style III - Positive
Six of the students in this sample were classified
as falling within the positive adaptational style category.
This category had two different elements within it:

a.

those

who felt that they could readily use at home what they were
learning in this country, and b.

those who intended (or

wanted) to remain in the United States and who thus deter­
mined their career objectives on the basis of the environ­
ment of the United States.
The students from India in this study were most
representative of this latter element.

One of these

students exclaimed:
The U. S. educational system is more flexible and
gives one more choice . . . I love it . . . it has
made a career for me. It has allowed me to be
mobile, moving upward all the time.

52
In India I could never have become a Ph.D.
student . . . Here I have been able to change
my field several times, I could never have changed
like this in India.
In this country I have had a chance to study about
educational systems from all over the world and
if I had the choice to make again I would choose
the U. S. system.
(6)
And another Indian student who was applying for
United States c i t i z e n s h i p explained:

The "brain drain" just doesn't apply in the Indian
situation. We have too many brains; there is too
much of a disproportion between available brains and
available material resources. The brains will be
useless unless there are resources by which they
can be put to use. Today there are 3,000 Indian Ph.D.'s
in the United States and India is better off because of
it; we are sending home money to our families and India
needs foreign exchange more than she needs us.
(8)
One of the Southeast Asian students who was char­
acterized under element a of this group offered this analogy
as he expressed his attitudes on the subject:
I am not very concerned about the problems of transfer
and adaptation . . . it is something like learning how
to play tennis on an asphalt court and then shifting
to a grass surface. The game is basically the same
except that you might not charge as fast lest you slip.
(12 )
The d i l e m m a of the stud e n t from a M i d d l e E a s t e r n

country (a-b) who appeared to want to remain here with her
family was largely the product of political considerations:
I have been thinking of developing a social studies
text for use in my country, but I could end up making
a great investment in time and effort only to have it
censored by the Government . . . it is the political
situation that makes most students from ____ reluctant
to go back. I have been happy with my experiences
within the College of Education. The professors here
seem to understand the difficulties of the foreign
student and their doors seem to be always open to us.
(5)

53
And these final two comments by Indian students
shed much light on the forces which push (or pull) students
into this particular adaptational pattern:
I see myself as a researcher. Research in education
has a low priority in India because of so many needs
of a more pressing nature. Therefore if I want to
do what I enjoy, and if I want to ever make any money
I had better stay in the United States. It isn't a
question of patriotism, I just don't feel that I
could ever really do much for India.
(8)
Is a country perpetuating a class system by taking and
sending people overseas to study agriculture and who
must return to a position in agriculture with little
chance of advancement . . .? Directly I was being
educated for an occupational role but indirectly I
was being educated to a philosophy of mobility, simply
by observing what is possible within this country.
(6)
RELEVANCE
Clearly related to adaptational style is the issue
of perceived relevance of educational experiences received
here in this country.

Relevance, as used here, refers to

the individuals perception of goodness of fit between a
person's goals (in this instance, his career and professional
objectives) and what the environment has to offer? whereas
adaptation, as used here, refers to how the individual reacts
to his environment in terms of this pursuit of relevance.
A particular perception of relevance does not
necessarily produce a corresponding adaptational style.

For

example (and as several of the students described in Style II
illustrate), an individual can regard as very low the

54
relevance of his educational experiences here and still
compromises usually being the product of cultural and
personality traits.
When these same fifteen students were categorized
in terms of the ways in which they seemed to view the
relevance of their educational experiences here in this
country, the results were noticeably different from those
of the adaptation categories. Whereas with adaptation a
content analysis of their remarks suggested totals of nine
negative (anxious-accommodating combinations), and six
positive; on the issue of relevance these same individuals
seemed to fall into a pattern of six-low relevance and five
medium-relevance, with only four of these students seeming
to consider the relevance of their education here to be
high.
Examples of Positions on Relevance
Below are some of the comments of these students
which reflect their attitudes towards the relevance of their
educational experiences here at this University, and at this
College of Education in particular.
Low Relevance
One of the students from the Middle East who dis­
played a great deal of concern about the relevance or
application of what he was learning to conditions in his
own country elaborated as follows:

55
The problems that you have solved in education and
which are no longer of crucial importance to you are
now of the most crucial importance to us. Money,
financing, school buildings are our big problems.
You are more concerned with such qualitative issues
as "special ed" problems or remedial reading— but
our problems are just so much more basic than these.
While you might spend as much as $1,800 per student
per year in some school districts, we spend only $18.
How can we begin to compare? The issues of develop­
ment are not going to be solved by following tradi­
tional American patterns. We must unearth new ways
and these new ways are not being discussed here.
(1)
The student from Southeast Asia was concerned mainly
about the "relevance" of certain courses which he had to
take in order to prepare for the general comprehensive
examination in Education.

He apparently recognized that

there was, within the University, course offerings which
would be more relevant to his own career needs but he was
up against the pressures of time and the priorities imposed
by degree requirements.
If I didn't have to take such courses as ed. admin­
istration and crucial issues of American ed. I would
have been taking courses related to Asia and my own
country and these would have better prepared me for
my career work; and, furthermore, I believe that they
would have given me the equivalent of the American
student studying about education in this country.
I would not deny that this can benefit me as well,
but given the shortness of time and my own priorities
I become very frustrated about this.
(15)
A student from South Asia took some courses which
he thought would be relevant to his interests in develop­
ment but was disappointed:
I would like a course on education and community
development. I did take sociology of education and

56
thought that I might get this sort of thing there
but all that I got from that course was some
definitions— nothing practical.
(10)
A note of irony appears in the comment by this
Southeast Asian student in this sample who was one of those
concerned about low relevance but who seemed to be adapting
in Style II (mixed) fashion as he appeared to be able to
meet frustrations with a calm spirit of acceptance:
Most of the courses that I have had I can under­
stand rationally, but in terms of my future job they
are irrelevant . . . I know about modular scheduling,
team teaching and so on; these may be fine for the
U.S. but they are too soon for my country— the pro­
blem there is not how but if we must first deal with
the problems of expanding ecTucation to all.
I wanted to join a course on Education in Asia
that is offered once a year but I was unable to get
in.
(14)
Medium Relevance
One of the students from

Southeast Asia who was

classified as adapting in a positive style seemed to be
more skeptical on issues which touched upon problems of
transfer and relevance:
Counselling strategies are very different in my country
and the United States and I must be aware of this . . .
It seems,that Americans know what you have to do and
then you do it; whereas in my country you might know
what to do but you don't necessarily do it . . . Our
values are not oriented towards ambition; our feeling
is that we are not going to live too long so let's
enjoy ourselves now. Outlooks such as this cannot
be approached upon the basis of the counselling stra­
tegies that are practiced in this country.
(12)

57
A student from the Middle East showed some concern
over the relevance issue but tempered this with the view
that his education here provided a foundation for broader
understanding:
Some of the courses are very interesting here but
whether or not they are going to really help me once
I get home I can't be sure . . . All of the infor­
mation that I have been getting here has been about
education in the U.S.; nothing so far about educa­
tion systems in other parts of the world and this
is what I need . . . But it must be the same every­
where— Harvard, Stanford, etc.— . . . I see the
courses here as opening the way to further education—
as providing a foundation to become self-directed.
(4)
And finally another student from the Middle East
(who was actually classified as low) in replying to a
question as to whether or not he would recommend another
student from his country to study here carefully qualified
his concern over the relevance issue by saying:
Yes, I would recommend a student to study in the
U.S. if the program were appropriate— that is,
purely technical matters; if there is too much
cultural content— no.
(2)
High Relevance
Only four of the students in this sample considered
their educational experiences here to be highly relevant
to their personal career objectives.

Surprisingly enough,

one of these was the Southeast Asian student who was cate­
gorized as seeming to have adapted quite negatively to the
environment as a whole.
position was that:

In terms of relevance his personal

58
X haven't thought about separate courses for
educational planning in developing countries. X
am more interested in looking at U.S. education and
seeing how it is done here . . . If I study about
a country that has the same problems X learn nothing
. . . If I study about U. S. ed, even though the
situation is very different from my country, at
least it is something new and maybe when X get
back home X can use some of these ideas.
(11)
And the position of one of the South Asian students
who was majoring in psychology and which seemed quite repre­
sentative of the rest of this group was
In educational psychology there is no provincialism;
principles of growth, change, and behavior are univer­
sal— they can be applied anywhere.
(7)
FACTORS AFFECTING ADAPTATIONAL PATTERNS
Within the data of this study there emerged a number
of elements which suggested themselves as possible variables
related closely to adaptational styles.

These elements

included occupational opportunity in the home country,
family status, and interaction patterns with members of
the faculty (especially their academic advisors) and with
other graduate students.

Other variables which seem logi­

cally important but which this study did not focus on
(because of the limitations imposed by the data) include
individual personality factors, the cultural distance be­
tween the student's country of origin and the United States,
and his home country's overall level of development.
Perhaps the best measure of occupational opportunity,
where the individual is concerned, is whether or not he

59
himself feels that he has an opportunity for a job— a
job that he will be satisfied with.

A variable, then, for

occupational opportunity in the home country that emerged
in this study, was whether or not the student reported that
he had a job waiting for him that he wanted to return to.
There were ten students in this study who reported
that they had definite jobs waiting for them and all but one
of these were categorized within adaptational Styles I and
II (representing various degrees of dissatisfaction with
their educational experiences here).

The only exception

among these ten was a student in educational psychology
who was returning to a college teaching position.

The

other five, all of whom did not have jobs waiting for them,
were categorized as belonging to Style III, which repre­
sents expressions of relative satisfaction with their
educational experience here.

On the basis of these patterns

two tentative hypothesis might be suggested:
1.

Students from developing countries who are
studying in the United States and who have
held positions (especially of an administra­
tive or planning capacity) in their home
country and who are planning to return to that
of a similar position are apt to perceive as low
the relevance of their educational experiences
at MSU and are likely to adapt with some degree
of negativeness (i.e., Style I or II) to the
environment of that university.

2.

Students who have not held occupational positions
or who were not satisfied with the positions that
they did hold (or their prospects for a better

60
position) are apt to perceive as relatively
high the relevance of their educational ex­
periences here and are likely to adapt posi­
tively (Style III) to the environment of the
university.
These two hypotheses assume that the contents of
the students educational experiences here are geared more
to the needs of a modern American society than to the needs
of a developing nation.

Also, no value judgments are

intended by the use of the terms negative and positive as
they refer to adaptational style.

For whether a reaction

is in fact negative or positive depends upon the environ­
ment which it refers to; that is, a negative reaction to
the environment of an American university on the part of
one of these students can be a positive reaction in terms
of his home country if it means that he is challenging the
utility of what he is learning in this country and is
determined to devote the majority of his efforts towards
acquiring understandings and skills that will be effective
within the environment of his own nation.

In the same sense,

the "positive reactions" of the student who fits into the
second hypothesis can have quite "negative" consequences for
his country of origin.
Comments on Occupational Opportunities
In the examples of adaptational styles given earlier
in this chapter the students dften referred to their concern

61
over being prepared for positions that they were returning
to.

Below are some more comments in which they make their

attitudes toward their future work and professional careers
very explicit;
For the student from the Middle East who decided
to leave after getting his M.A. the question of future job
responsibilities seemed to be of major importance:
Today I have an M.A. in educational administration,
but I am not in any way prepared to carry out the
duties which I will be expected to carry out once
I get home . . . if I decided to go on for the Ph.D.
it is obvious to me that it would just be more of the
same— a waste of time.
(1)
A student from Southeast Asia who was majoring in
educational media was anxious over the fact that he would
probably he asked to set up some sort of instructional
media or educational T.V. center when he returned.

He was

disappointed because all of his course work had been theory
oriented and that he had received very few opportunities to
actually work with media equipment.

He commented:

I was promised a job upon return before I left
home . . . I am very concerned about my ability to
live up to their expectations. If it wasn*t for
that I might have given up my search for relevance
and just stayed here.
(15)
A student from South Asia expressed his dilemma this
way:
In my country my job was as Coordinator of training
programs for what is essentially a community devel­
opment project . . . I was instructed to major in
educational administration here but I have found

62
that my needs are of a much more inter-disciplinary
nature with most of the emphasis on sociology and
economics. There really isn't any coursework here
that is directly related to the type of work that
I'll be doing at home.
(10)
An Indian student/ who considered as dim his
prospects for ever finding a job in India that he could
be satisfied with, declared:
I came to the United States as an immigrant and I
want to stay because of the opportunities here. With
the situation in India as it is my "God given" abilities
simply could not be used, either to my own advantage
or to the advantage of others.
(8)
And another Indian student who was very international
in his outlook indicated how his professional concerns
affected his adaptational style when he commented:
I am motivated by the fact that I will someday be a
Ph.D. and I will have to meet the responsibilities
associated with that title . . . I am frightened
by the idea of sitting around a table with a group
of colleagues and not being able to contribute as
an equal— of being unfamiliar with certain works
in my field . . . I am very aware of the competition.
(6)

Within this sample there were not enough variations
to allow for any significant inferences about the importance
of family status as a determinant of adaptational style.

Five

of the students were single, eight were married and had
their wives and children with them, and only two were married
with their wives remaining back in their home country.

Both

of those students whose wives were not with them were cate­
gorized as seeming to fit adaptational Style II, which

63
suggests that they had distinct reservations about their
academic environment here but seemed to be coping with
that aspect of their lives nevertheless.
If the adaptational styles categorization that has
been used here had included the total environment of these
students (e.g., social life, free time activities, preoccu­
pations , etc.) the fact that their wives were not with them
would have had a significant bearing in terms of charac­
terizing their adaptation to the total environment.

The

following two quotes are from students whose wives were not
with them:
I have many personal problems here but the biggest
one is that my wife is not with me. We were married
only seven days before I left and I have been trying
ever since to save enough money for her to join
me . . . but now my grant has terminated and I can
hardly support myself let alone a wife in this country. . .
I think so much about this that it is almost impossible
to concentrate on my studies anymore.
(9)
And the Southeast Asian student in this sample
whose wife had given birth to their first child since he
arrived here said:
Here no one really knows me or cares about me . . .
I miss my wife and my son so much— that for me is
happiness . . . the only important moment that I
have each week is when a letter from my wife
arrives.
(14)
Interaction Pattern with Faculty
An admittedly arbitrary classification was also
made of these fifteen students in terms of their relationships

64
(interaction patterns) with their advisors and other
faculty members.

The assumption was that a satisfactory

relationship with members of the faculty would correlate
with a positive reaction to the environment of the
university, and that the opposite would be true when the
student perceived of his relationships with faculty members
as being unsatisfactory.
assumption out.

The results seem to bear this

Ten of the students were judged as seeming

to be generally dissatisfied (i.e., more dissatisfied than
satisfied) with their relations with members of the faculty,
and of these ten, nine fell within adaptational Style I
and II (negative).

The other five students were classified

as being generally satisfied with their relations with their
advisor and other faculty members and each of these was
classified in adaptational Style III (positive).
This relatively wide dissatisfication should not be
too surprising in that it is generally difficult to find
an American graduate student these days who is highly
satisfied with the nature and quality of his interaction
with members of the faculty as they compete with many others
for the time and attention of the faculty.

The difference,

however, is that the American student is generally more
aggressive in this struggle for time and attention; he is
usually more adept, by virtue of familiarity, at gaining
access to the informal system of the academic setting.

He

65
tends, therefore, to have a better understanding than the
foreign student of where, when, and how to get the in­
formation and attention which is an important part of
survival in the environment of a graduate school.
The comments that follow are illustrative of these
conditions as well as of some of the attitudes that these
students possess regarding their experiences with their
academic advisors and with other members of the faculty.
Examples of Interaction Patterns with Faculty
A student from the Middle East who was obviously
dissatisfied over his relationship with his advisor
commented:
I came here one year ago and I have seen my advisor
only twice— and the initiative didn't come from him.
I have selected my courses myself. No one has really
given me any help.
(3)
Another student from the Middle East who saw his
advisor more often but who was equally dissatisfied with
the results of these encounters said:
My advisor is never prepared for me. When I ask about
courses he just picks up the schedule, scans it, and
says "try that." The courses have been irrelevant . . .
I felt my advisor let me down. He was the only person
I could depend upon and when he began giving me bad
advice as to which courses to take I began to lose
trust in him.
(4)
A student from South Asia was dissatisfied with his
advisor but did not feel that he could do anything about it.
I have not been satisfied with my advisor . . .
My advisor was assigned to me— this should be my

66
choice. Yes, you can change but how can I— I
would be doomed . . . My advisor would be insulted. . .
A foreign student just doesn't dare to do the things
that an American student would do.
(9)
For the student from the Middle East who decided
to leave, it appears that his relationship with his advisor
may have helped him in making that decision.
I seldom see my advisor and when I do he looks at
me suspiciously. When I first went to him he said
"I don't know what your wishes are; I don't know
anything about education in Turkey; how am I
supposed to help you.
Well I didn't ask him to be my advisor, I was
assigned to him. Maybe I expect too much but I
thought he would be prepared for me, prepared to
help me.
(1)
Another student from the Middle East sheds some
light on the reasons for some of their difficulties in
adapting to the student-advisor relationship:
We are not accustomed to using advisors and counsellors
since we do not have them in our country. When we go
to our advisor and if he does not encourage us we will
just not go back. We do not know what is culturally
acceptable in this situation— what and how much to
tell him. They must encourage us and let us know.
(3)
A m o r e positive r e a c t i o n to his r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h

his advisor was offered by this student from Southeast Asia.
My advisor has been very helpful— he has been to
Nigeria. I think that you can say in general that
professors who have worked abroad are more under­
standing of the foreign student. I have had many
problems: passport, sickness, and he has always
been willing to help me.
(15)
These reactions seem to corroborate the findings
of Richard Miller who carried out a study of foreign student

67
advisors at Michigan State and a number of other univer­
sities and concluded that while these advisors are generally
satisfied with their ability to deal with problems involving
visas, financial aids, and the like; they feel that they are
"least effective in functions involving the academic advising
of foreign students" (Miller:

1968).

Attitudes Tow a r d s P r o f e s s o r s w i t h K n o w l e d g e o f T h e i r C o u n t r y

In response to a question as to whether or not they
preferred professors who have extensive knowledge of the
conditions in their home country there were the anticipated
positive responses as well as a few unexpected (to this
author) observations;
These two replies are representative of the more posi­
tive responses:
During the two years that I was at Kansas State
I didn't meet any faculty members who knew about
Indonesia . . . Here there are several people who
know a lot about my country and they seem to have
a better idea as to what I need in terms of the
conditions in my country.
You feel comfortable if someone knows your back­
ground. It is definitely easier to talk to people
who have been exposed to other cultures.
(7)
Quite different observations were offered by these two
students from South Asia:
There really isn't much difference between the professor
who knows your country and one who doesn't. In fact
if he knows your country he might try to dictate to you—
tell you what to do— what you should study and how you
should apply it . . . If he doesn't know anything about
your country you can just listen to all that he has to
say and then decide for yourself what to concentrate on.
(9)

68
And a student from India made this observation:
Many of the faculty know about India— but when they
handle this knowledge in public they twist it around
and spice it up so as to draw attention to themselves.
I hate them when they do this. They are not being
intellectually honest. They are "selling” according
to the tastes of the American public.
(6)
The comment of another student from India suggests
the close correlation that seems to exist between faculty
relationships and adaptational styles:
I avoid those profs who are up tight about the brain
drain— this is my business— they apply generalizations;
how can they know my background and everything else
about me necessary to place value judgments on me?
How do they know what the job opportunities are in
my particular community and environment . . . It is
fortunate that I can always find professors who see
the situation differently, and that is how I select.
(8)
Attitudes towards Student-Professor Interactions in the Classroom
These students also provided some interesting insights
as to how they reacted to their professors within the class­
room situation.

The following four comments reflect some

of these reactions:
I like it when the professor just suggests something
and then lets us contribute. This makes us individuals—
in traditional societies this is impossible. I believe
the discussion method is very important, it gives the
individual a chance to say what he believes.
(14)
In my courses I take a passive role because I have felt
that my questions and interests might be irrelevant to
the needs and interests of the rest of the class . . . I
was reluctant to monopolize their time with my concerns.
(10)

69
I like the open interaction between professor and
student that I find here? this fosters critical
thinking and therefore issues are approached from
several points of view.
(2)
There are some professors with open-minds who see
that I can possibly contribute a new perspective to
an issue of concern to American education— a crosscultural perspective, perhaps, and they seem to
welcome my contribution.
Others, however, seem to have the attitude that "Oh
these foreign students just don't understand our
culture and our problems and therefore they are
just wasting our time with their viewpoints.
(9)
More directly related to the issue of studentfaculty interaction, especially where the student's advisor
is concerned, is the comment of this student:
I really wonder if there is ever any intimate inter­
action between student and professor in such a large
university as this.
(15)
Many an American graduate student has probably
wondered the same thing, of course, but again the differences
where he is concerned is that he need not be so dependent
upon members of the faculty in coping with the environments
of the university and the college for they can say— in the
words of the song— "we have each other."

The same is not

always true for the foreign student, however.

The next

section is concerned with that topic--the interaction
patterns of the foreign student with other graduate students
in his academic area.

70
Interaction With Other Graduate Students
Another sojourn variable which seems to be an
important determinant of adaptational styles (as defined
here) is the nature and quality of the foreign student's
interaction with other graduate students in his academic
area.

This variable is clearly related to the preceding

variable— interaction with faculty— in that it also involves
the notion of access to the informal systems of the graduate
school environment.

The informal system in this instance

can include the cubby-hole type offices provided graduate
assistants, coffee-room conversations, and such outside
activities as informal gatherings at each others homes and
at local drinking establishments.
The previously mentioned study by Selby and Woods
at Stanford focused on this question of student access to
such informal systems and remarked:
The foreign student sees himself as being cast out
upon a society that he cannot know, cast off from
the association of his fellows, driven by the
demands of examinations, assignments, quizzes and
prescribed readings. . . . (p. 144.)
Selby and Woods likened the plight of the foreign
student in an American university to that of the new worker
described by George Homans in his "Bank Wiring Room Study"
(1950) in that the foreign student, like the new worker,
must depend upon his fellow workers to find out what in fact
has to be done.

Homans called this the "internal system"; he

says that whereas the management will tell him (the worker)

71
about productive goals, work methods,, incentive pay and
competition, it is his fellow workers who will have to
tell him how in fact each of these functions.

This

information that his fellow workers offer usually is a
very different picture from that which the management has
of these same operations.

Selby and Woods drew upon Homan&

and characterized the foreign students in their case study
in this way:
If we think of the foreign students as new employees
and the American students as the workers, we can see
that the accommodations and agreements that make up
the "internal system" are not available to the foreign
students. The foreign students are not privy to the
agreements made by American students and are instead
working on a different system.
(p. 146.)
As for this study at Michigan State, it was diffi­
cult to draw meaningful conclusions, on the basis of the
data available, as to the effect that interaction with other
students has on shaping adaptational styles.

The interview

results do suggest that some of these students have gained
access to such an "internal system" within the College of
Education at this University, but that the majority of these
students are not incorporated into the sort of internal
system that Homans has described.
Within this sample, three patterns of interaction
seem to be present:

for some of these students interaction

is virtually limited to other students from their own country
(at least in so far as their academic lives are concerned);

72
others, by virtue of having graduate assistantships, find
themselves interacting more with other American students
in their academic areas; and still others seem to be very
much alone in this regard.

Below are some of the comments

which illustrate these three patterns of interaction (or
lack of it) with other students in the same academic area.
Interaction Patterns With Other Foreign Students
In instances where there were relatively large
communities of students from the same country within the
University, there is a tendency for these students to rely
upon each other for information and feedback related to
their academic lives.
A student from the Middle East explains why he relied
on other foreign students for his information:
I get a lot of my advice from other foreign students.
While the American student might say to me "take this
one, it is easy" or "don't take that one, it is too
hard"; the foreign students will tell each other about
how much reading is required or other problems related
to language.
(4)
The comments of this Indian student touch upon the
cultural forces which help to shape his particular inter­
action patterns:
In India I could always turn to someone in my group for
help with my schoolwork. . . . But here I cannot get
such help. There is a difficulty in access. . . .
Americans are so busy . . . and the cultural norms
are so different . . , It is easier for me to inter­
act with other Indians.
(6)

73
Yet even when the student has a number of colleagues
from his own contry studying with him there can be difficul­
ties, as this student points out:
I don't know too many American graduate students.
I am reserved and busy . . . I pick my friends very
carefully. When X was single and studying for my
masters here at
U. I met many more Americans. Now
I have too many colleagues here. Not only does this
close us off from others but we get involved with
problems of status and competition— especially trouble­
some are the younger, "first-timers" with their high
and unrealistic expectations.
(2)
And finally there is the Middle Eastern student
in this category who was quite frank as to why he did not
prefer to associate extensively with some of his American
colleagues:
Some of the students in my classes make such easy
generalizations about the countries that we are
studying about that I just cannot accept them as
graduate students. They express so much self-super­
iority in these generalizations.
(3)
Interaction Patterns with American

Students

Very few of these students were in a network which
included many American students who were also working in
their area.

One of the exceptions was this student who

describes the difference that being part of such a network
made:
My first year I did not have an assistantship and
therefore did not have a desk or office to go to and
therefore had no real opportunity to interact with
other grad students . . . you are lost without a desk
to go to . . . You are out of the system and therefore
you do not have daily interaction with colleagues and
faculty.

74
This year I have an assistantship and a desk and
I even come in nights and on weekends just for a
chance to talk with other grad students.
It gives
me a great deal of stimulation to be able to inter­
act regularly on this basis.
(6)
Another student who held an assistantship with the
educational psychology department said:
I've been given an assistantship by the psychology
department and this has really made things better
for m e . It has given me a lot of experience in my
area; a convenient place to work and study; and the
opportunity to interact with my colleagues.
(7)
But more common are the stories of those who tried
to become a part of such a system by way of an assistantship
and were unsuccessful:
The foreign student here never has a chance to do
anything in terms of research or teaching. Several
times I have inquired but I am always told that "all
the money we have is for American students" . . . We
don't want the money— only the experience. So they
tell us "if you want to do research go to the library."
The library! huh . . . so you go and do a paper for
a professor and what sort of feedback do you get . . "A"
or "B" and nothing else, not even a comment— what good
is that? (4)
The saddest stories came from those students who do
not feel that they are a part of any system (as far as
their academic lives are concerned) and find that they must
cope alone within the challenging environment of the graduate
school.
A student from South Asia commented:
It is very hard to get help from an American student.
Some will give help but most are quite negative. If
we have trouble understanding a lecture and afterwards
ask an American student for help he will usually say
"I don't know" and just walk away— very few will help
you.
(9)

75
A student from Southeast Asia viewed the diffi­
culties of not having access to such a system from another
perspective:
I never have the slightest idea as to who the
instructor is or what he is like until I walk
into the classroom. This has hurt me . . . I
should have tried to find out more about the
professor and how he taught the course . . .But
this is difficult for me to find out. I have
no one to ask such questions to.
(15)
A student from the Middle East reported:
I often want to talk to my classmates, to ask
them about courses or examinations. But they
are always in a hurry, once class is over they
just disappear. It is very difficult to get to
know them.
(5)
An Indian student observed:
I think that the educational system here helps to
perpetuate individualistic attitudes . . . Americans
seem to lack a spirit of universality . . . Striving
for grades is all-important here. In India students
are generally willing to help each other, but not
here. This pattern interferes with friendships. It
is easier to make friends with people outside of your
own classes.
(7)
A Southeast Asian student in this study told of an
incident which suggests some of the inevitable difficulties
of cross-cultural interaction, even amongst people who are
supposed to have superior educations:
One student asked me . . . "How is it that you can
learn our culture and not change?" How can he ask
that? My feeling is that "you should be a good
American and I should be a good Indonesian— then
maybe we can communicate better.
(14)

76
And this same student reflected well the loneliness
of the students in this group when he commented:
I really get no help from others; my motivation and
background are so different— what I feel is impor­
tant I cannot say to others. I get no chances to
talk with faculty or other students about the things
that I want to discuss.
(14)
SUMMARY
The fifteen graduate students in education from the
Asian region who participated in this study have been char­
acterized as reacting to their academic environments in
this country in what seem to be three distinct adaptational
styles.
as:

These styles have been described in this chapter

1) negative-anxious, openly dissatisfied with their

educational experiences here; 2) negative-accommodating,
relatively dissatisfied with their educational experiences
here but willing to accept this situation as a fact of life;
and 3) positive, relatively satisfied with their educational
experiences here

(this category was further divided

into two sub-sections).
The interview results suggested a number of variables
which appear to be related to the formation of these adapta­
tional styles.
chapter were:

The possible variables discussed in this
the student's perception of the relevance of

what he was learning here; whether or not he had a job
waiting for him in his home country; his family status;

77
his interaction patterns with members of the faculty;
and his interaction patterns with other graduate students.
The following table indicates where each of these students
seemed to fall in relation to these areas.

(See page 78.)

STUDENT
1
2
3

4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15

RELEVANCE
Lo
Lo
Lo
Md
Hi
Md
Hi
Hi
Md
Lo
Hi
Md
Md
Lo
Lo

FAMILY
JOB
STATUS STATUS
Sgl
yes
M-W
yes
M-W
yes
M-W
yes
M-W
no
M-W
no
M-W
no
Sgl
no
M-WO
yes
M-W
yes
Sgl
yes
mixed
Sgl
no
Sgl
yes
M-WO
M-W
yes

FACULTY STUDENT ADAPTAINTERINTER- TIONAL
ACTION
ACTION STYLE
—
0
1
1-2
0
1-2
0
2
+
3
% +
+
3
+
+
+
3
+
3
+
2
2
1
0
+
+
3
+
0
3
2
1
—

—

Explanation of symbols:
M-W married with wife here.
M-WO married but wife is at home.
Job Status:

whether or not he has a job waiting for him
at home that he wants to return to (and
continue within).

Faculty Interaction:
+ indicates relative satisfaction in this area.
- indicates relative dissatisfaction in this area.
Student Interaction:

this applies to interaction with
other graduate students in relation
to academic matters.
0 indicates that interaction is mainly restricted to
fellow students from one's own country.
+ indicates heavy interaction other (American and
foreign) graduate students in own area.
- indicates that student reports very little inter­
action with any other students in this regard.
78

CHAPTER IV
SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION
An exploratory study of this type does not lend
itself easily to precise summary statements.

Some general

observations can be put forward, however, in terms of the
two areas of focus that were singled out within the "purpose
of the study" statement that appeared in the first chapter.
The first of these was:
a.

How do these students view the relevance of that
which they are learning in this College and
University?
Relevance, as used in this study, refers to the

goodness of fit between what a person perceives as his own
needs or objectives (career and professional concerns in
this case) and what the environment has to offer.

The

individuals in this study were fifteen graduate students in
education from the Asian region and their immediate environ­
ment was Michigan State University, and its College of Educa­
tion in particular.

It should be noted again, as it was in

chapter one, that the "environment" referred to here repre­
sents only those elements of the environment which the indi­
vidual perceives or chooses to expose himself to.
79

80
Three categories were used to classify these
students in terms of their perceptions of relevance:
low relevance - those students who found little positive
correlation between their academic objectives (i.e.,
interests, concerns) and their academic environments here;
medium relevance - those students who were concerned about
the relevance of many of their educational experiences here,
but who also were willing to accept much of what they were
learning as being of at least indirect value to their per­
sonal and career objectives; high relevance -

those who

considered the bulk of what they were learning here to be
highly relevant to their personal career objectives.
On the basis of statements made by these students
(examples of which appear in chapter three) admittedly
arbitrary decisions as to these classifications of relevance
were made:

six of these students seemed to view as low the

relevance of their educational experiences within this
College and University; five seemed to hold perceptions of
medium relevance; and only four seemed to view as high the
relevance of their educational experiences here.
The second major area singled out in the "purpose
of the study statement" was:
b.

How do these students adapt to the environment of
the College of Education (and the University)?
Closely related to perceptions of relevance were

the "adaptational styles" which these students assumed.

81
Adaptation, as used in this study, refers to the process
of reacting to and interacting within a given environment
(in this case, the students perception of the environments
of the College of Education and the University).

There­

fore, whereas relevance refers to how the student views
or feels about his environment in terms of how well it
meets his personal objectives, adaptation refers to what
he does about each of these factors (i.e., does he change
his objectives; does he change the environment; or does he
actually leave for a more hospitable environment such as
his home culture?).
On the basis of the interview results with these
students, three different adaptational styles have been
proposed.

Briefly, these are:

Style I - Negative-Anxious; students who express open
dissatisfaction over their educational experiences
in this country to the point that they actually
leave or threaten to leave and, if they remain,
they tend to be highly critical of the conditions
and content of their academic experiences and
remain anxious over these concerns.
Style II - Negative-Accommodating; students who are
dissatisfied with their educational experiences
here but who are more likely to accommodate and
to accept the conditions for what they are.
Style III - Positive: includes students who are generally satisfied with their educational experiences
here and who feel that they can readily use in
their home country that which they are learning
in this environment (type a) as well as those
students who are satisfied because they intend
to remain in the United States (type b ) .

82
These three adaptational styles are defined in
greater detail in chapter three along with various quota­
tions from the students in the study population which are
representative of elements of each of these styles.
Factors Affecting Perceptions of Relevance and Adaptational
Styles________________________________________________
While perception of relevance and adaptational styles
are closely related the two do not necessarily go hand in hand.
Whereas eleven of the students had serious reservations about
much of what they were learning in terms of its application
to their own national and cultural setting (and consequently
of its relevance to their personal career and professional
objectives) only three of the fifteen students were openly
negative (in terms of adaptation) about their educational
experiences here.

An interesting question that remains

unanswered, therefore, is why, of the eleven students who
viewed as relativey low the relevance of their educational
experiences here, did three of them react to the environment
of the College in an openly negative way while the other
seven reacted in an accommodating fashion, and, in two cases,
a positive style?
After dismissing the possible variable of regional
differences because it allowed for too many exceptions, the
variables of occupational opportunity in the home country,
family status in the United States (i.e., with or without

83
families), and interaction patterns with faculty and other
graduate students were considered.

Three other variables

which may be very important in determining adaptational
styles but which this study was unable to consider are:

the

home country's level of development (economic, social,
political); the "cultural distance" between the student's
home country and the United States; and (perhaps most
important) individual personality characteristics.
In relation to the variable of occupational oppor­
tunity as it effects adaptational styles, two possible
hypotheses were suggested on the basis of the study data.
The essence of these are:
1.

If the student has waiting for him a job that
he wants to return to (especially one involving
planning or development work) he is more likely
to view as low the relevance of his educational
experiences in this country and to adapt in a
negative way to the university environment.

2. If the student doesn't have a job waiting for him
that he wants to return to he is more apt to view
as moderate or high the relevance of that which
he is learning and to adapt in either a mixed or
positive pattern.
Not enough data was available to draw any conclusions
about the effects of family status or interaction patterns
with other students and with faculty as determinants of
adaptational styles.

In regard to the latter, however, the

reported experiences and stated feelings of the students in
this study suggest that there is probably a high and positive
correlation between the intensity and quality of these

84
interactions and a positive style of adaptation (see
p. 78).

Accordingly, two tentative and closely related

hypotheses might be suggested as a basis for further inves­
tigation into these areas:
3.

The greater their opportunity for intense
and meaningful interaction with faculty
and other graduate students (especially
encounters related to academic concerns
which involve their own personal objec­
tives) the lesser the tendency for these
students to react to the college environ­
ment in a "negative-anxious" style.

4.

The greater their opportunity for gaining
access to an "internal system" of the
College (e.g., via assistantships) the
lesser the tendency for these students
to react to their educational experiences
here in a "negative-anxious" style.
IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
The major function of an exploratory study of this

nature is to define some of the elements of a "problem"—
to explore its parameters and to suggest potential areas for
more detailed investigation.

Several such elements have

been examined within this study and referred to already in
this chapter.

At the risk of being repetitive a number of

areas which might readily lend themselves to further and
meaningful investigation could include the following:
1.

A further refinement of the typology of adapta­
tional styles that has been presented here: Are
these "Styles" representative of most students
from developing nations pursuing advanced pro­
fessional study in the United States? How wide­
spread are reactions similar to those in Styles
I and II? Are the proportions of students within
these two categories increasing? What about those
in Style III?

85
2.

3.

What are the crucial factors which predispose
(i.e., background variables) a student to
adapt in one of these styles? Possibilities
might include:
a.

Occupational opportunities in home country?

b.

Home country's level of development?

c.

The "cultural distance" between the home
and host country?

d.

Attachment (personal) to home country?

e.

Family position, wealth, religion, etc.?

f.

Individual personality factors.

What are the crucial factors which affect a student's
adaptational style while he is studying in the
United States (i.e., sojourn variables)? possibilities
might include:
a.

The content and nature of the material and
skills that he is being exposed to (are they
relevant?)?

b. The quality and intensity of his
with members of the faculty (his
adviser? within the classroom)?

interactions
academic

c. The quality and intensity of his interactions
with other graduate students in his area (i.e.,
interactions of an academic/professional nature)?
d.

His family status while in the United States
(i.e., is he single, or did he leave his wife
and family at home?)

There are of course other causes— some minor, some
major— which contribute to the formation of a particular
adaptational style? however, these possible factors have been
singled out here because of the frequency with which they
suggested themselves within the interview sessions.

86

Due to severe time limitations in the carrying
out of this study, it was

not possible to build

a time dimension.

research in this area should

Future

within it

take into account the changing nature of the student's
perceptions of relevance throughout his sojourn experience
as well as any changes in his adaptational patterns.
Also of great importance in a study of this nature
is the question of how realistic the expectations of these
students are to begin with and what is the source of these
expectations.

Such expectations are of obvious importance in

the shaping of adaptational patterns.
And, of course, the whole issue of adaptational
styles is not limited in application to the foreign student.
This same theoretical orientation could provide an inter­
esting base for exploring howother groups of students
to and within the environment of the university

react

(or a

similar setting).
IMPLICATIONS FOR THE COLLEGE OF EDUCATION AT
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
The question of adaptational styles is of special
interest to the social scientist per se.
concern for the educator has to be:

Of more pressing

What are the implica­

tions of these conditions in terms of the educational ob­
jectives of these students?

87
The situation here seems to be this:

At any given

time there are approximately sixty students enrolled in
Michigan State University's College of Education from what
are usually referred to as "the developing nations."

This

particular study was limited to those students who had been
enrolled for at least a year; were on campus during the
summer of 1969; and were from the "Asian region.”

This

group may or may not be representative of the total popula­
tion of the graduate students from "developing nations" in
this College, but there does seem to be a strong chance that
they are.

If they are, the following conclusions might be

suggested:
Of the students from "developing nations" studying
at the graduate level at Michigan State University's College
of Education, evidence suggests that:
1.

A substantial number of these students might be
adapting to the environment of the College with
strong to mixed attitudes of negativeness towards
their educational experiences here;

2.

A substantial number of these students might have
serious reservations about the relevance of what
they are learning here to their own professional
careers (and therefore to the needs of their home
countries* as well, in most cases);

3.

There is a need for more course work directly
related to the problems and issues of education
in the countries of the developing world, espec­
ially for courses with a planning orientation;

4.

There is a need for establishing a way whereby
these students can have frequent and meaningful

88

(i.e., professional/academic) interactions with
faculty members who have concerns and interests
which are related to or similar to their own;
5.

There is a need for establishing a way
whereby these students can have frequent and more
meaningful contact with other graduate students
who have concerns and interests similar to their
own.
That Michigan State University and its College of

Education should be, and indeed is concerned about these
issues and conditions relative to its foreign student popu­
lation seems hardly a matter of debate.

The strongest

traditions of this University have been built upon the
notion of providing the people whom it serves with a
"relevant" and "meaningful," form of education.

As the

University has served Michigan and the nation in this regard,
so also is it concerned with serving other nations and the
students of those nations as she continuously expands her
international dimension.
The word "relevance," unfortunately, has become
almost a dirty word in University circles these days as its
use immediately conjures up images of the demands of the
S D S and the Black Student Movement.

Without entering into

the issue of the validity of the claims of these groups it
can be suggested here that any"relevance gap" which those
students encounter as members of a modern American society
would almost certainly appear miniscule besides the "relevance
gap" that is continuously encountered by many of the students
in this study (see chapter III).

89
Strangely enough, however,, the appeals for relevance
as voiced by this group remain largely inaudible.

One

Nigerian student (not in this study) offered a possible
explanation to me by suggesting that this condition is a
result of receiving all of their previous education within
systems which are even less relevant than what they are
exposed to here (and having taught in a British school in
Borneo for two years I am well aware of what he was referring
to!)

There is another reason, however, and it seems especially

unfortunate in this day and age.

It's essence was captured

in the remark on an Indonesian student in this study when
he commented, "I am but one student, and I am but a guest.
How can I complain?"
Well today it is unlikely that he is just one student
with unusual concerns, but is instead a part of a growing
group of similar students with similar concerns.

Nor is

he merely a guest in the sense that he should have less say
in the shaping of his own academic life while in this country
than any American student.

He is, rather, a partner— a

partner in furthering international development and under­
standing— and it is as a partner that he should be treated.
Richard Niehoff, Assistant Dean for International
Programs at Michigan State University, in a communique to
the Dean for International Programs, touched upon some of
the same issues that have been treated in this study and

90
suggested some steps that might be taken for meeting some
of these concerns.

Niehoff recommended that a determina­

tion be made of "the extent to which the colleges of this
University have made any specific accommodations to the
problems of foreign graduate students" and that there should
also be a determination of:
the feasibility of establishing a credit or non-credit
seminar in each college especially designed to provide
an opportunity for foreign graduate students to discuss
problems of adapting the materials presented in their
several programs of study to the needs of their countries.
The "seminar" would have the important by-product of
indicating to these students the view that MSU is
interested in their use of the training being provided
for their home countries. . . . Students from different
countries could be brought together to discuss devel­
opments in their countries . . . faculty members having
experience in those countries might be related to such
groups.1
RE COMMENDATIONS
With the "Niehoff Proposal" as a stepping off point
I would like to set forth a similar proposal and delineate
some possible elements within such a seminar program which
I feel would serve to better meet the needs of the graduate
students from "developing nations" studying at Michigan State
University's College of Education (and especially those stu­
dents who fit into "adaptational Styles” I and II as they
have been outlined in this study):
^■Richard Niehoff to Glenn Taggert.
(With permission of the author.)

March 1968.

91
PROPOSAL
An interdisciplinary seminar similar to the one
proposed by Niehoff should be set up within the
College of Education on a "credit" and continuing
basis.
a.

Such a seminar should be open to all interested
students from "developing nations" and to other
students who also have a serious interest in
this area (an effort should be made to recruit
students from outside the College of Education
as well— -e.g., from anthropology, economics,
political science, etc.);

b.

Such a seminar should have a faculty coordinator
to serve in a resource and organizational capacity
(but not a planning capacity, necessarily, as
this should by and large be assumed by the
students themselves) ;

c.

On the basis of the interests of the participants
in a given seminar, members of the faculty from
within and outside of the College of Education
should be invited to serve as resource personnel;

d.

The seminar should be problem or issue oriented
according to the particular concerns and interests
of a given group of participants;

e.

Funds should be available for bringing in non-MSU
personnel when there is such a need or interest;

f.

The seminar should operate on a "pass-fail" basis
with all active participants receiving an automatic
pass;

g.

The seminar should operate continuously with
participants able to repeat for up to 9 or 12
credits;

h.

The possibility should be explored for having
participation in this seminar serve as a partial
or complete alternative to the General Professional
Examinations in Education;

i.

A major function of this seminar should be to generate
dissertation projects for the participants as well as
to serve as a sounding board and resource center once
dissertation or similar projects get under way;

92
j.

Team arrangements for such dissertation efforts
should be encouraged. While dissertation research
would in most cases be carried out in the student's
home country, "pilot-type” research efforts within
the United States should also be encouraged as a
preliminary step;

k.

Among the funding arrangements that might be consi­
dered is an allocation of some of the money which
the doctoral student currently pays for disserta­
tion fees ($500-1100 per student) in the light of
the fact that they will be centralizing faculty
resource personnel for this purpose;

1.

Outside funding arrangements, especially for support
of research activities should also be explored—
including private foundations and the Agency for
International Development.
Explicitly, the rationale for such a program, in

the light of the findings of this study, include:
1.

Such a program would greatly increase the potential
for the individual student to integrate and apply
in a "relevant" situation that which he is learning
within the University environment;

2.

Such a program would give these students an oppor­
tunity for "meaningful" (i.e., as it relates to
their professional concerns and objectives) inter­
action with various members of the faculty (esp.
faculty whom they would probably not have come in
extensive contact with otherwise);

3.

Such a program would give these students continuing
opportunities for extensive interaction with other
students holding similar and related interests; it
would in a sense make them part of an "internal
system" which would have the by-product of meeting
many of their psychological needs as well as their
career objectives.
The program that has been suggested here is proposed

for discussion purposes.

Many elements of it could be dropped

and certainly many could be added before a satisfactory final

\

93
product emerged.

I have discussed with several of the

students that I interviewed the outlines of such a possible
program and they generally expressed much enthusiasm over
the idea.

They stressed the importance, however, of granting

credit for the time spent and also of the need to develop
an alternative to the General Comprehensive Examinations
which are such a nebulous barrier and continuing source of
frustration for so many of these students.
Certainly participation in such a seminar for an
extended period could be as valuable to these students as
the time which they currently find themselves spending in
preparation for the general comprehensive examinations.

And

certainly their desire for "credit" for this time and effort
spent should not be considered as utilitarian for, like it
or not, the name of the game continues to be "degree,"
(both in the United States and abroad) in terms of professional
advancement and it would be a sad state of affairs if the
struggle for the "degree" had to preclude the "quest for
relevance."

APPENDIX
Interview Schedule
1.

What is your major?

2.

How long have you been at MSU?

3.

How did you happen to choose education as a career?

4.

Why did you want to study in the U. S.?

5.

Are you married?

6.

How old are you now?

7.

What were you doing just before you came to MSU?

8.

What does your ministry expect you to get at MSU (in
terms of training)? Are you getting this?

9.

Have you ever thought of staying in the U.S.?

Children?

(Here or home?)

10.

What sort of work do you intend to do after you graduate?

11.

When you begin work, what kind of problems do you feel
that you will have to deal with most frequently?

12.

Do you think that your training will be good enough for
you to be able to do all of the things which you might
be expected to do in your work?

13.

What are the most important courses that you have taken
this year? What makes them important?

14.

What courses have been least important?

15.

What things about your work this year have given you
the most trouble?
94

Why?

r

95
16.

What was your single biggest problem during your
first months in school?

17.

How did this problem work out?

18.

Do you have a set pattern for studying?

19.

How many hours a day do you study?

20.

How have your grades been so far - GPA?

21.

Which is most important to you:
class lectures:

22.

Who has been helping you the most in deciding what
courses to take?

23.

Have you been able to discuss such things with
faculty members as often as you'd like?

24.

Do you do much studying with or discuss the classwork
with other students in your own area?

25.

Are these usually students from your own country?
other foreign students? or American students?

26.

Do you get much help from other students in deciding
how much work to do and what things to concentrate on?

27.

Have you taken any courses outside of your own area?
What?

28.

Have you ever attended any of the special lectures or
symposiums that are sometimes held on campus? Which
ones?

29.

What do you feel are some of the greatest strengths
of the educational system in your country?

30.

Some of the weaknesses?

31.

Have you always felt this way or have some of these
opinions developed since you have been in the United
States?

32.

These weaknesses:

your own reading?

Do you think they can be changed?

96
33.

Do you think that it will be difficult to introduce
such changes?

34.

Do you think that having a course in how to introduce
change would help you?

35.

Have you had any such courses at MSU?

Why or why not?

36.

What do you think are" some of the greatest strengths
of the U.S. educational system?

37.

Some of the weaknesses?

38.

Have you had a chance to visit any secondary or
elementary schools and to observe actual classes in
action?

39.

What did you think of them?

40.

Are there any specific educational practices which
you have seen or read about in the U.S. that you might
want to try and introduce into your own school or
country?

41.

Have you done many things with Americans outside of
school?

42.

If you were in a position to introduce some new courses
or to make some other changes in the academic program
here, what would you recommend?

43.

What about the comprehensive examinations?
satisfied with these as they are?

44.

How do you feel about the grades that are given in your
regular course work?

45.

How do the other students that you associate most with
feel about them?

46.

Would you prefer a system in which all of the grades were
on a pass/fail basis? Why?

47.

How would you feel if you flunked out of graduate school?

48.

Have you ever felt like just quitting?
didn't you?

Are you

Why and why

49.

Why is the degree important to you?

50.

Do you feel that grad students get enough oppor­
tunities to teach or to do research with a professor?

51. How important do you think that this kind of experience
is?
52.

What sort of teaching practice or research have
you had?

53.

The undergraduate have supervised teaching experiences
in local schools. Would you want to have such an
experience for yourself?

54.

How do you think most Americans feel about your country

55.

What about the faculty members that you have been in
contact with? How do they seem to feel about your
country?

56.

Do you prefer faculty members who have some knowledge
of the educational system in your country or doesn't
it make any difference?

57.

Some people say that foreign students often try to take
advantage of the fact that they are foreign and that
they sometimes get higher grades than they have earned
because of this. How do you feel about this?

58.

When people ask
just talk about
said that makes

59.

What do you like best about the United States?

60.

Least?

61.

Finally, if when you return to your country you should
be in a position to recommend a student for graduate
study overseas, would you advise him to study in the
U.S.? Why?

62.

At Michigan State?

h

you questions about your country or
it, is there anything that is often
you annoyed or angry?

Why?

As was indicated in chapter one, this interview schedule
served more as a check list in actual use and was only
referred to periodically during the interview sessions
to assure that certain areas were being covered.

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Beals, Ralph L. and Norman D. Humphrey.
No Fronteir to Learning:
The Mexican Student in the United States. Minneapolis: University
of Minnesota Press, 1957.
Beck, Robert H.
"Professional Training in Education for Foreign
Students in the United States" in Sanders, Irwin T. (ed.). The
Professional Education of Students from Other Lands. New York:
Council on Social Work Education, 1961.
Bennett, John W., Herbert Passin, and Robert K. McKnight.
In Search
of Identity: The Japanese Overseas Scholar in America and Jap a n .
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1958.
Coelho, George C.
Perceptions.

Changing Image of America: A Study of Indian Students'
Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press, 1958.

Davidsen, Oluf Mejer.
"Visiting Scandinavian Students at the University
of Wisconsin, 1952-54: A Study in Cross-Cultural Education."
Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, University of Wisconsin, 1956.
DuBois, Cora,
"Some Notions on Learning Intercultural Understanding,"
in George D. Spindler (ed.), Education and Anthropology. Stanford,
California; Stanford University Press, 1955,
pp.89-105.
_____ . Foreign Students and Higher Education in the United States.
Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1956.
Eren, Nuri.
"Supply, Demand, and the Brain Drain," Saturday Review.
August 2, 1969.
—
Foster, George.
Traditional Cultures and the Impact of Technological
Change. New York: Harper and Row, 1962.
Gezi, Khalil Ismail. The Acculturation of Middle Eastern Arab Students
in Selected American Colleges and Universities. New York: American
Friends of the Middle East, 1959.
Gullahorn, J. T. and Jeanne E. Gullahorn.
"An Extension of the U Curve
Hypothesis," Journal of Social Issues. Vol. XIX, No. 3 (July, 1963),
pp. 33-47.
Homans, George.
1950.

The Human G r o u p .

New York: Harcourt, Brace and World,

98

99

Hountras, Panos T. "Factors Associated with the Academic Achievement
of Foreign Students at the University of Michigan from 19471949." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, University of M i c h i g a n
1955.
Lambert, Richard D. and Marvin Bressler.
Indian Students on an
American Campus. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1956.
Merton, Robert K. and Patricia Kendall.
"The Focused Interview,"
American Journal of Sociology, LI, 541-542
Metraux, Guy S. Exchange of Persons: The Evolution of Cross-Cultural
Education. Pamphlet No. 9. New York: Social Science Research
Council, June, 1952.
Miller, Richard E. "A Study of Significant Elements in the On-the-job
3ehavior of College and University Foreign Student Advisers."
Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1968.
Morris, Richard T. and Oluf M. Davidsen.
The Two-Way Mirror: National
Status in Foreign Students* Adjustment. Minneapolis: University
of Minnesota Press, 1960.
Overton, William.
"Can the Developing Nations Afford American Higher
Education," College and University. Summer 1967.
Open Doors 1968. Report on International Exchange.
Institute of International Education, 1968.

New York:

Sanders, Irwin T. (ed.). The Professional Education of Students from
Other Lands. New York: Council on Social Work Education, 1961.
Scott, Franklin D. The American Experience of Swedish Students:
Retrospect and Aftermath. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota
Press. 1956.
Selby, Henry A. and Clyde M. Woods.
"Foreign Students at a High Pressure
University," Sociology of Education. Spring 1960, pp. 138-154.
Shinouda, Elia Habib.
"An Appraisal of the Program leading to the
Doctor of Education Degree at Indiana University as Related to
Foreign Students." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Indiana
University, 1966.
Sewell, William H., Richard T. Morris and Oluf M. Davidsen.
"Scandinavian
Students' Images of the United States: A Study in Cross-Cultural
Education," The Annal s . American Academy of Political and Social
Science, 295 (September, 1954), pp. 126-135.

100
Smith, M. Brewster.
"Cross-Cultural Education as a Research Are a , ”
The Journal of Social Issues, XIII (No. 1, 1956), pp. 3-8.
Spencer, Richard.
"The Academic Performance of Foreign Students in
American Colleges and Universities: Commento on the Literature
1960-1967 with Bibliography," Research Report #29. Measurement
and Research Division, Office of Instructional Resources,
University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, 1967.
Spindler, George D. (ed.). Education and Anthropology. Stanford,
California: Stanford University Press, 1955, pp. 106-110.
Useem, John and Ruth Hill Useem. The Western-Educated Ma n in India:
A Study of His Social Roles and Influence. New York: Dryden
Press, 1955.
Watson, Dorothy Jeanne and Donald Lippitt.
Learning Across Cultures:
A Study of Germans Visiting America. Ann Arbor: Research Center
for Group Dynamics, Institute for Social Research, University of
Michigan.
Wilkening, Walter Theodore.
"Factors Associated with Adjustment of
Foreign Students Studying Extension Education at Selected LandGrant Universities." Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University
of Wisconsin, 1965.