Framing the Study

My dissertation research employs qualitative methods to engage international undergraduate students and their instructors in an examination of academic inclusion in class settings. I ask three questions:

1.       How does Mid-Atlantic State University (a pseudonym) define and operationalize “academic inclusion” as a component of academic quality?

2.       How do individual instructors interpret/operationalize MASU’s commitment to academic inclusion with respect to international undergraduate students?

3.       How do international undergraduate students perceive institutional and instructor efforts to provide an inclusive academic environment?

Purpose of the Study

At its heart, this is a study of perception. I am most interested in learning how students receive policies and practices intended for their benefit. In many ways, this study evokes traditional program evaluation by tracing the inputs and outputs of policies targeting specific student populations. However, I prioritize ethnographic methods to examine campus policy, instructional practice, and student perception from a qualitative perspective. Rather than test hypotheses, I combine policy document analysis with individual interviews to learn if and why participant perceptions diverge from institutional goals. In doing so, my work extends efforts by scholars such as Chris Glass, Tang Heng, and Minghui Hou, who focus on international student perceptions of culturally engaging campus environments (Glass et al., 2022).

The Literature in Context

Over 4,000 international undergraduate students enrolled at MASU’s main campus in Fall 2023, part of the 1 million+ international students who continue to study in the U.S. post-pandemic (Open Doors, 2023). These students help individual institutions meet a variety of needs, not least in terms of tuition dollars: international students contributed over $40 billion to the U.S. economy in 2022-2023 (Banks, 2023). Beyond financial benefits, international students also offer intellectual and cultural contributions to the U.S. institutions they call home (Shiel & McKenzie, 2008). Over time, a variety of efforts have emerged to bolster international student development on U.S. campuses. Movements to “internationalization at home” stress integration across domestic and international student groups (Almeida et al., 2019), while efforts to internationalize the curriculum (Leask, 2015) and enhance global learning (Landorf et al., 2023) integrate international, intercultural, and global dimensions into course content, learning outcomes, and teaching methods.

Landorf and Whitehead (2022) make a direct connection between the tenets of global learning and the practice of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in U.S. higher education. Common characteristics that drive existing DEI policy include offering equitable access, participation, and engagement across courses, programs, and experiences; creating inclusive institutions and classroom spaces; creating a culture of belonging; and developing a culture that values contributions by all (Landorf & Whitehead, 2022). Such characteristics lead Landorf and Whitehead to argue that outcomes tied to both DEI and global learning frameworks “include the importance of critical reflection, action that leads to a positive impact in communities, and integration of diverse perspectives. Both aim to ensure the representation of and create a sense of belonging for all community members” (2022, section on “Ways DEI and global learning can intersect”). Despite the affinity between common conceptions of DEI and the application of international perspectives through policy and practice, however, in many ways international students represent an underserved subpopulation within existing DEI frameworks in U.S. higher education.

In fact, a variety of scholars argue that the current relationship between U.S. postsecondary institutions and the international students they serve often exhibits a deficit pathologization (Glass et al., 2017; Mittelmeier & Cockayne, 2020; George Mwangi & Yao, 2021). International students on U.S. campuses are often viewed as “inferior” or “intellectually unequal,” a deficit perspective that stems, scholars argue, from a neo-colonial mentality that values Anglo-Saxon and European identities as dominant and superior (Hayes, 2019; George Mwangi & Yao, 2021; Lomer & Mittelmeier, 2021; Stein & de Andreotti, 2016). A variety of scholarship calls for institutions to acknowledge that neo-colonial mentality, shed it, and take responsibility, through both policy and practice, to create a more equitable and inclusive learning environment (Heng, 2021; Buckner & Stein, 2020; George Mwangi & Yao, 2021). Doing so would require recognizing international students’ heterogenous experiences and needs, the assets they bring to the class setting, and the cultural backgrounds that impact behavior in the learning environment. In that vein, research has shown the need to recognize international students as a marginalized group alongside other U.S. domestic student groups through both policy and practice (Leask & Carroll, 2011; Tavares, 2021).

Good practice in postsecondary curriculum design (Lattuca & Stark, 2009) and institutional assessment (Banta & Palomba, 2015) suggests that an institution’s commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion should be visible in both policy and practice. Within the curriculum, policy and practice related to academic inclusion represents a key mechanism for delivering equitable and inclusive learning environments to all students. Academic inclusion is defined as the “recognition of individual and cultural differences so as to ensure the possibility that all students, regardless of their backgrounds, have the opportunity to maximize their starting abilities” (Freda et al., 2016, p. 17). The American Disabilities Act (1990) provides one of the most concrete examples of inclusive educational policy in U.S. higher education, mandating that all postsecondary institutions must provide resources and services for students with learning disabilities. International students also come with a set of heterogenous experiences and needs that can be addressed through policy and practice. A wealth of scholarship investigates the needs, challenges, and successes experienced by international undergraduate students at U.S., with a substantial focus on the role of language as an “all day challenge” (Gautam et al., 2016) and the disruption that may occur within an international student’s sense of self when coded as “other” within the context of U.S. higher education (Page, 2022). Decades of research also sheds light on the impact of the “hidden curriculum” on international student experiences (Sambell & McDowell, 1998; Margolis, 2001; Óron-Semper & Blasco, 2018), while other scholars have focused on the role of student-faculty interactions (Glass et al., 2015). The concern is that, because international students are often assumed to be less capable of critical thinking, less able to participate in classroom contexts, and more likely to commit plagiarism (Page, 2022), they may not receive the same level of quality education as their U.S.-born peers.

Why It Matters

The importance of this study lies in its potential to highlight the gap between policy and practice when it comes to academic inclusion for international students on U.S. campuses. The growing numbers of international students enrolled at U.S. institutions brings financial, cultural, and intellectual benefits, but also underscores the urgent need for institutions to meet the unique needs of this student population. By understanding the perceptions of both students and instructors, we can pinpoint areas where institutional commitments to diversity, equity, and inclusion may not fully extend to international student groups. This work holds the potential not only to inform future policy and practice but also to reshape the narratives around international students as valued contributors to the university community. Institutions must be proactive in recognizing the assets these students bring to class settings and take concrete steps to ensure their experiences reflect the values of true inclusion and equity.

—

For a full list of references, click here.