The Emotional Dimension of ‘mixing’ in an Internationalised Classroom: A Pathway Program Case Study

IHR Note: We are proud to open the fifth annual volume of the International HETL Review (IHR) with the academic article contributed to the January issue of IHR by Drs. Brie Willoughby-Knox and Lynda Yates. As the title indicates the authors investigate social processes occurring in the classroom and draw conclusions about the impact of social connectedness. The authors describe in significant detail the research methodology and the qualitative research methods applied, and discuss in depth the findings of their study. In particular the authors highlight the role of learner emotions and the need to guide learners in order to facilitate social inclusion and intercultural mixing, leading both to a higher degree of internationalization of the classroom environment and to higher student satisfaction faction with their educational experience.

Author bios: Brie Willoughby-Knox is a PhD candidate at Macquarie University, Australia. She has received a BA in English from Roanoke College, USA and a Masters in Applied Linguistics from Macquarie University, for which she researched Indian English in Australia and was the graduate speaker. Brie has taught Creative Writing, ESL and Academic Literacy in the USA, Korea, Japan and Australia. She currently teaches in a university pathway program in Sydney and develops courses for several institutions. Her current research interests are intercultural communication, social inclusivity, learner emotions and professional development. Contact email address: [email protected]; [email protected]

Professor Lynda Yates is the head of the Linguistics Department at Macquarie University, Australia. She holds a B. Hons in Modern Languages from Manchester University, a Masters in Language Studies from Lancaster University and a PhD from LaTrobe University. Lynda has gained extensive experience in adult TESOL and teacher training whilst living in the U.K., France, Armenia and Egypt. Lynda has been Senior Researcher and then Acting Director of The Adult Migrant English Program Research Centre (2000-2009). Her research interests include various aspects of adult language learning, specifically approaches to inclusive classroom teaching and professional development for teachers. Contact email address: [email protected]

The Emotional Dimension of ‘mixing’ in an Internationalised Classroom: A Pathway Program Case Study

Brie Willoughby-Knox, Macquarie University, Australia

Lynda Yates, Macquarie University, Australia

Abstract

In this article, we explore issues of social inclusion in the internationalised higher education classroom of an Australia pathway program. There is growing interest and literature on the importance of social inclusion and intercultural ‘mixing’, but seldom are these issues examined or addressed at the micro level of the classroom. Data were collected for this ethnographic case study through in-depth interviews and classroom observations. It was found that participants engaged, learned and flourished most in classes where they felt socially connected. Although the students prioritised ‘mixing’ with peers from diverse backgrounds as fundamental to their intercultural learning experience, enacting ‘mixing’ proved difficult. Contrary to the literature, opportunities for ‘mixing’ were plentiful, however, without guidance or support, the students were unable to take up those opportunities and sustain intercultural interactions. It was found that learner emotion often underpinned failed attempts at ‘mixing’. It is argued, therefore, that learner emotion be brought to the fore of the changing pedagogy that prioritises social inclusion as a key component to a quality internationalised higher education learning experience. This would enable and empower practitioners to address some of the issues of internationalisation and realise its potential benefits in their classrooms.

Keywords: higher education; internationalisation; social inclusion; learner emotion

Introduction

The composition of university enrolment in Australia and other OECD countries, such as New Zealand, Canada, the United States and the United Kingdon, has changed tremendously over the past two decades from predominantly white English native-speakers to a highly internationalised student body. It is now commonplace that Australian students study alongside peers from widely diverse cultural backgrounds with varied linguistic abilities. This mix offers potential benefits and opportunities for all students, including: improved intercultural competence and understanding (Campbell, 2012; Cruickshank, Chen & Warren 2012; Mak & Kennedy, 2012; Popov, Brinkman, Biemans, Mulder, Kuznetsov & Noroozi, 2012), a greater sense of belonging (Ardoukis, Watty, Biak, Yu, Borland, Chang, Lang, Lang & Pearce, 2010) and a richer academic and ‘Australian’ learning experience (DEEWR, 2009), all of which culminate in a better student experience.

However, the idea that “international students bring information (social, political or economic) about their home countries and thus widen the instructors’ and [local] students’ perspectives on the world” is often overlooked and underutilised (Ladd & Ruby, 1999, p.363). Internationalisation should improve the higher education learning environment and experience for all, but regrettably, this is seldom the case. Rather, the consequences of these changes have been seen as largely negative. Researchers, the media and governments have reported a worrying drop in academic standards, a decline in the English language levels of international graduates and dissatisfaction with the quality learning experience promised (Birrell, 2006; Bretag, 2007; Murray, 2010). These problems are widely acknowledged, and various stakeholders have offered solutions. The Australian federal government has conducted large-scale surveys and published advisory papers, urging measures to assist international students to better integrate with their Australian peers and the wider community (AEI, 2012, p.iv). The Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR, 2009) funded a project to set up ten ‘Good Practice Principles’, urging universities to provide sociocultural and linguistic support to international students, so that they “are equipped to participate effectively in their studies.” Mentoring initiatives, counseling provisions and the creation of new administrative positions to monitor student engagement have been instituted in an attempt to lessen the negative effects of internationalisation and realise the potential benefits (Burdett & Crossman, 2011; Crossman, 2008), albeit with limited success. While these government and university-level approaches are sound and feasible, they operate on a macro-level, ignoring what happens in the most crucial environment for learners: the classroom.

The classroom is where learning begins, not only of content, but also of cultural and social interactions. It may sometimes be the only place where contact between local and international students takes place (Eller, Abrams & Zimmerman, 2004; Yates & Wahid, 2013), and is therefore an ideal platform for intercultural communicative learning to occur, unique in its chaperoned format and shared goal of knowledge acquisition. Academic, social and cultural engagement are intrinsically linked and should be considered as a conceptual whole. As Volet and Wosnitza (2004) explain, international education should “provide opportunities for students to learn how to ‘read’ socially and culturally diverse situations and apply knowledge appropriately” (p.6). Recent research indicates that improving intercultural communication, social inclusion and mixing at the classroom level is vital for the aims of the internationalisation movement to come to fruition (Arkoudis, Watty, Baik, Yu, Borland, Chang, Lang, Lang & Pearce, 2012; Campbell, 2012; Harrison & Peacock, 2010; Kimmel & Volet, 2012). In this paper we explore how students in an Australian university pathway program construct those concepts, the difficulties they have in enacting them and what can be done to address those difficulties, particularly on the emotional level of learning.

Literature Review

There is now a strong body of research indicating that, despite the potential benefits of the internationalisation of education mentioned above, interactions between culturally diverse students are minimal (Kimmel & Volet, 2010; Smart, Volet & Ang, 2000; Summers & Volet, 2008; Ward, Masgoret & Gezentsvey, 2009; Yates & Wahid, 2013). Some studies report that this lack of social inclusion and mixing is a serious detriment to the student experience (Campbell & Li, 2007; Harrison & Peacock, 2010). A recent review of the Australian Universities Quality Agency (AUQA) reports submitted by 14 universities indicates that international students are dismayed at the lack of opportunities to forge meaningful relationships with local students (Burdett & Crossman, 2011). Such findings are similar in other OECD host countries, such as New Zealand, where, of the 140 Chinese students Zhang and Brunton (2007) surveyed, 55% reported being “dissatisfied with the availability of opportunities to make New Zealand friends” (p.132).

Affording students from diverse backgrounds opportunities to mix is an important step in building their intercultural competence and promoting social inclusion in the classroom, however, it alone does not necessarily lead to more intergroup interactions (Kimmel & Volet, 2010; Cruickshank et al., 2012). Teachers may, for instance, assign group tasks with a goal of providing their students with opportunities to mix; however, if no real provisions are made by teachers to guide intercultural communication and collaboration, social goals may easily be derailed by narrow personal goals (Volet & Mansfield, 2006). Similarly, Cruickshank et al. (2012) found that without thorough planning, support and management on the part of the teacher, group work “could confirm and construct the power and dominance of some groups of students and the marginalization and lack of participation of others” (p.807). This has been supported by a number of authors who have noted that the initial reaction of students, given increased but unsupported opportunities for intercultural interactions, is often a rise in anxiety and a drop in confidence (Aberson & Haag, 2007; Harrison & Peacock, 2010; Summers & Volet, 2008). Harrison and Peacock (2010) contend that stronger efforts should be put forth to provide managed contexts in which intercultural encounters are positive, meaningful and non-threatening. Encouraging teachers to take an active role managing intercultural communication tasks is the logical next step. Arkoudis led a two year project investigating what could be done through university teaching to harness the potential of internationalisation and promote interactions between students from diverse backgrounds (Arkoudis et al., 2012). The resulting resources to support practitioners in enhancing intercultural student engagement are extensive, including an “Interaction for Learning Framework”, which elucidates how teachers can encourage and support intercultural interactions by planning interactions, setting clear expectation, creating a suitable environment and so on. However, one aspect that was overlooked in this comprehensive guide and the related literature is the emotional dimension of intercultural learning and teaching.

Content learning, social inclusion and the student experience more generally are regulated by emotions. Emotional engagement is increasingly recognised as central to deep authentic learning and instrumental in enhancing or inhibiting learning (Fitzsimmons & Lanphar, 2011; Fried, 2011). Linnenbrink and Pintrich (2002), for example, found that negative learner emotions can reduce working memory, intrinsic motivation and the ability to use cognitive strategies for deeper thinking. Research into the role of emotions in learning at the tertiary level has begun gaining ground (e.g., Brockbank & McGill, 2007; Mortiboys, 2012), but learner emotions specific to the internationalised education context have largely been neglected. We can no longer afford to ignore this dimension; rather, it should be informing intercultural teaching practices in higher education and illuminating the difficulties that are often wrongly attributed to cultural and linguistic differences. Murray (2010) notes, for example, the emotional trauma suffered by international students with low English competency who experience “anxiety, frustration, de-motivation and an inability to engage with the learning process” (p.56). He argues that the measures taken to address English language levels of these students only further marginalise and isolate them, inhibiting their educational and linguistic development. More positively, Cartney and Rouse (2006) further add that practitioners need “an awareness and understanding of the emotional aspects of learning, whilst maintaining a focus on the academic task, can help to foster an environment where students can develop their potential” (p.81). Although social inclusion is now widely recognised as crucial to the international learning experience, the acknowledgement of learner emotion as a key component to social inclusion is rarely made explicit in the literature. It is imperative, therefore, to turn our attention to the emotional dimension of social learning, teaching and practice in the internationalised classroom.

This study

The original goals of this case study were guided by the following lines of inquiry:

• How do students operating in an internationalised classroom construct concepts like social inclusion and mixing? What personal value do they put on intercultural connectedness as part of their student experience?
• What specific difficulties do these students have mixing, if any? What can be done to better equip students and teachers to deal with these hurdles?

During the process of data collection and analysis, a third line of questioning emerged that could not be ignored:

• What part do emotions play in mixing amongst students from diverse cultural and language backgrounds in the classroom?

To tackle these questions and address the gaps in the literature on internationalisation, an ethnographic case study of two university pathway program classes was conducted.

Research Methods

The ethnographic case study approach

Ethnographic case study research aims to “understand and interpret the behaviours, values and structures of collectivities or social groups with particular reference to the cultural basis for those behaviours and values” (Duff, 2008, p.34). In line with the aims of this study, the approach can provide ‘rich’ descriptions (Geertz, 1973) of individuals and interactions in a particular context and is useful for understanding the complexities and dynamism of classroom interactions, which require observation, time and reflection. While case study research is singular and bounded, it can lay the groundwork for general claims within the field (see Duff, 2008).

Context of the study: A university pathway program

Of Australia’s 39 universities, over half have established pathway programs which provide extra study time to those unable to meet academic, English language or other entry requirements (Brewer & Zhao, 2010, p.35). Recently, some pathway programs have extended their services to Australian school-leavers who were unable to meet university entry requirements. Data for this study were gathered from a direct entry pathway program in Sydney, Australia for local and international students in small class settings (maximum 18). This pathway program is tiered into three sections: Standard Foundation (3 semesters), Accelerated Foundation (2 semesters) and Diploma Studies (2 to 3 semesters). International students are placed according to their IELTS (International English Language Testing System) score and high school completion results; local students are placed according to their ATAR (Australian Tertiary Admissions Rank) results. High-achieving students may articulate into a mainstream university course after their Foundation course, but most do so after first completing the Diploma program.

Although pathway programs have the potential to be an important academic stepping stone, they have been harshly criticized as a ‘back door’ means to university entry (Benzie, 2010, p.451). Brewer and Zhao (2010) note the growing concern in the academic community that pathway initiatives “may lead to a lowering of standards within universities, hence compromising academic reputation with all its attendant consequences” (p.35). This view of pathway programs is unfortunate in light of their potential to offer the opportunity of university study to students who may otherwise be excluded. In addition, it is the first opportunity for most students in the pathway program to work with peers from diverse backgrounds. This study experience, therefore, provides an ideal context for the early prevention of socially isolating practices and promotion of socially inclusive practices. As Kimmel and Volet (2012) argue, “on evidence that culturally homogenous groups are firmly established within the first year of study, it appears imperative to promote intercultural interactions and amenable attitudes towards intercultural encounters from the very start of students’ study experience” (p.177).

Data collection

The data reported here are part of a larger study, in which observations and interviews were conducted with two classes studying Academic English at the Accelerated Foundation level of the pathway program described earlier. All Foundation level tutors were informed about the research project and volunteers were recruited. Two classes on the same course were then selected based on timing and the diversity of students. It is worth noting that, given Australia’s geographic position, the majority of international students in these classes were from East Asia, as China is the largest contributor to Australia’s international student population. The majority of local students in these classes came from diverse backgrounds. The students in those classes were invited to volunteer for the study during their first class and were asked if they would also like to participate in an individual interview later in the semester. All students in the participating classes were free to opt out of being observed, but none took it. The recruitment and management of participants adhered strictly to the regulations of the formal ethics approval obtained. The class taught by Kathleen (N=18) comprised all Health Sciences students, most of whom intended to study Nursing, which has high entry requirements at the affiliated university. Ben’s group (N=17) consisted of 13 Information Technology (IT) students and 4 Health Science students. Please note that pseudonyms have been used throughout.

I observed both 4-hour classes over a 12-week semester, which resulted in 96 hours of extensive field notes. I am a tutor at the institution, which allowed me access to the research site and familiarity with the staff, but in a different stream so there was no confusion as to my role as researcher. Halfway through the semester, individual face-to-face interviews were held with all student participants from the observed classes who volunteered (N=7 from Kathleen’s class and N=10 from Ben’s class) and both tutors. The data discussed in this paper are primarily taken from those semi-structured interviews (see the Appendix for interviewee information). The interviews lasted 45 minutes to an hour and covered topics on peer relationships, social inclusion, communication strategies and the tutor’s role in the classroom. Burgess (1984) describes the semi-structured research interview as a “conversation with a purpose” (p. 102). That purpose, in this case, was to explore students’ experiences, views, emotions, beliefs and meaning-making systems in their first semester as a member of an international classroom. The interviews were voice-recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically with the software NVivo10, according to the principles of qualitative content analysis (Mayring, 2000). Emergent themes were first identified during the initial transcription, then were further refined during the proofreading process and were agreed upon by the authors.

Data Analysis

Social inclusion, exclusion and ‘ugly ducklings’

The way that local and international students articulated ‘social inclusion in the classroom’ was similar: the ability to voice their opinions, establish friendships and actively participate. They preferred classes where this happened. Hamid, a local student with a Lebanese background, explained that for him social inclusion meant being able to interact on both an academic and personal level with a network of friends. In classes where he was unable to forge friendships, he felt isolated and excluded, and this affected his self-esteem and identity to the extent that this young man with a tough exterior referred to himself as an ‘ugly duckling.’

Hamid:               In English I feel excluded because I don’t know hardly no one. No one cares what I have to say. The one I feel heaps close in, it’s pretty much Maths.

Interviewer:     Maths? Okay, so why? Explain those two classes a little bit.

Hamid:               Maths, I know everyone in the class. We always just get in and muck around and we do the work together and stuff. English is pretty much… you know when you say ‘the ugly duckling’? I feel like the odd one out.

(Hamid, 19, Australian, Lebanese background)

Because Hamid was not included in his English class, he believed that no one valued his opinions. Similar ‘ugly duckling’ terms were used often by students when explaining why they did not enjoy particular classes. Feelings of isolation and loneliness or inclusion and togetherness in a certain class consistently related to how the class operated and whether it fostered social networking and idea-sharing.

Similarly, Sasha, a Lebanese-born local student, reported a preference for her highly participatory Society and Culture class, in which she had received high grades. In Chemistry, where she felt isolated and uneasy, she rushed through the coursework in order to leave as quickly as possible and her grades suffered as a result.

Interviewer:     What classes do you feel really included in? Are there any classes that you feel like you’re on the outside?

Sasha:                 Definitely, the class that I feel most included is Society and Culture. I guess it’s because there’s a lot of discussions in that class and I’m always involved. I’m always just out there and it’s actually a good thing because it’s showed: It was my first high distinction! I like that subject because I’m just always involved. I always have my opinion and so I guess that’s the best subject so far.

Interviewer:     How about the opposite? Is there – out of all your five classes – is there one class you feel not really included and on the outside a little bit?

Sasha:                 I guess Chemistry. I do my work there. Basically, in Chemistry I go to class, do my work, don’t even talk, just do my work and go – like get out of there as fast as I can. That’s it. And I’m not doing that well.

Interviewer:     Why is that, do you know?

Sasha:                 I don’t communicate much with the students there. I don’t know. It’s just like they have their own little groups and the teacher doesn’t care about my ideas.

(Sasha, 18, Lebanese-born Australian)

In the interviews, the connection students felt with peers often had a direct impact on how they connected to the course content. Their ability to engage with each other in a meaningful way was reflected in their ability to engage more deeply with the material. This synergetic relationship between social inclusion and academic success is rarely addressed in the literature (see Bean & Eaton, 2000; Freeman, Anderman & Jensen, 2007; Rosenthal, Russell & Thomson, 2007; Summers & Svinicki, 2007), but could further stress the necessity for socially inclusive learning and teaching practices. Inclusive classroom cultures allow students to receive, question, debate, internalise and apply course content to their broader learning experience. For the students in this study, social inclusion played a significant part in determining which classes they felt comfortable and confident in, could engage with course content, and ultimately, flourish.

Why ‘mixing’ is not happening

Despite sharing a similar understanding, appreciation and desire to enact social inclusion, sustained mixing still did not often occur, in line with the body of research that highlights the commonality of small group self-selection based on nationality and the sparseness of social interaction between students from diverse backgrounds (Benzie, 2010; Rosenthal, Russell & Thomson, 2007). International students in particular often mentioned that, although staying within an insulated group was the easier choice for them, it is not what they truly wanted. These students expressed frustration that the reality of their social education experience was at odds with their original goal of forming relationships with peers from other backgrounds, especially local peers.

One student, Kim, however, showed an ability unique among her peers to navigate with apparent ease between two distinct and separate social groups in her class: a Chinese group and an Australian group. She was motivated by a desire to improve her English and understand the Australian way of life. She sympathised with her friends from a self-segregated Chinese group that sat together in the back of the room and seldom interacted with peers outside of that group.

Interviewer:     Do you sit with the same people in every subject?

Kim:                    Almost. We’ve been with each other for 10 weeks now, so we know that normally the Chinese stick with the Chinese and, I don’t know why, but they feel like outsider with the Western peoples.

Interviewer:     Why do you choose to sit with Western people?

Kim:                    I think, firstly, I want to improve my English and also I want to be involved in their daily life. I want to know how it looks and feels to be a Westerner and I’m a bit outgoing, I guess. I learned to be brave.

Interviewer:     Yes, you are. How about the other Chinese ladies that don’t talk to the Westerners so much? Why do you think they choose to only talk to each other?

Kim:                    I think because it’s in their comfortable zone. They feel comfortable to speak Chinese with each other and that makes it much easier. They don’t have to talk English and all that […] They are afraid of maybe sometime people can’t understand them, like they feel embarrassed. But they really want to have the friendships, they just don’t know how.

(Kim, 18, Chinese)

From the interviews, it was clear that most local and international students understood and could articulate the potential personal gains from a socially-inclusive internationalised classroom. Despite this, however, the majority of Kim’s international classmates remained isolated within their nationality groups, perhaps because the benefits did not outweigh the risks for them, or else they did not know how to break out of their comfort zone and negotiate the crossing of cultural barriers, a process which requires deliberate mentally-demanding effort (Volet & Ang, 2012).

While the literature consistently reports the dismay felt by international students at the lack of opportunities to forge meaningful relationships with the local students (Benzie, 2010; Burdett & Crossman, 2011; Montgomery & McDowell, 2009), it was clear from both observations and interviews that there were plenty of opportunities for these students to have intercultural interaction, from which relationships could have developed. In the two classes observed, it was consistently the local students who initiated intercultural interactions. The local students in Kathleen’s class made many attempts at empathetic communication in the first few weeks of the semester, but were discouraged when responses seemed reluctant. From there, the opportunities for relationship-building dwindled.

Interviewer:     Do you think it’s similar working with other local students and working with international students?

Dawn:                 Yeah. But then – so there’s a lot of international students, half the class really. But within them, half of them I’m pretty close with and the other half not so much. The reason being that they don’t really want to talk to me. They’re kind of like, I just want to stay with my people – just speak their own language and everything, so I can’t really follow. They don’t even want to try to work with me. But then the other half who really engage with the class and everything, I’m pretty close with them.

Interviewer:     That’s really interesting. So the ones that you engage with and the ones that keep to themselves, do you approach them both at the same time and see what happens? Or do you wait until they come and talk to you?

Dawn:                 Oh no, I approach them. Yeah, I approach them. But sometimes if their responses aren’t that great then I stop trying because then I feel like I’m annoying them. The first few weeks I kept coming up and being like, ‘Hey how are you?’ Their response was, ‘Uh, I’m good, I’m good’. That was it and it was a bit awkward. So I was thought I’d better stop trying.

(Dawn, Australian, Indonesian background, 18)

This poignant example clearly illustrates that simply affording students opportunities for intercultural contact is not enough. Without guidance or support from the tutor, opportunities were often missed or fell flat (see Harrison & Peacock, 2010). In Dawn’s case, the comfort zone of the four young Chinese students that she had attempted to befriend became physically demarcated by a table squeezed into the back of the classroom. The perimeter of their comfort zone seemed to become more difficult to penetrate over time, keeping those inside isolated and those outside excluded. Several Australian students confirmed in their interviews that they saw the self-segregation of groups of international students in this way as a practice of exclusion. Class observations confirmed that if opportunities for mixing were not taken up in the first few weeks of the semester, they became increasing more difficult and unlikely.

From this data, it is clear that if the processes and practices of social inclusion are not made explicit, students may retreat into a comfort zone default mode, socialising and working only with peers from similar backgrounds, in order to maximise social connectedness and minimise risk. Despite elucidating the benefits of mixing and expressing a strong desire to form intercultural friendships, the students here often reported that forging friendships with those outside of their nationality group was too difficult and emotionally-taxing.

The emotional level of social inclusion

While it is understood that dividing and defining students by their local or international status has the potential to “gloss over the actual diversity in both groups, leading to an overemphasis on difference” (Cruickshank et al., 2012, p.798), it is also important to report trends that are clearly demarcated by that categorisation. While both local and international students frequently reported strong emotional responses to their experience of participation, peer interaction and social exclusion, the emotions were quite different. Although both groups put similar emphasis on the importance of social inclusion and intercultural interactions, the actual process of mixing often brought on ‘fear’ emotions in international students and ‘annoyance’ emotions in their local counterparts.

While Dawn’s unsuccessful encounters with international peers left her feeling annoyed, Stella, a 21 year old Chinese nursing student, described feeling embarrassed when she could not understand or respond fully to her Australian classmates, a response that is likely to discourage mixing. Because Stella could not respond quickly enough or elaborate her thoughts in the limited time available, she felt ‘uncomfortable’, ‘embarrassed’ and ‘ashamed’.

Interviewer:     Do you feel comfortable talking with your Australian classmates during activities?

Stella:                 Sometimes I do, but when they speak too fast I feel uncomfortable. Even though – I cannot speak too fast as well. I can speak one word or only a few clearly. Sometimes we cannot just speak quickly and straightaway like them. I get so embarrassed and ashamed and my face is red. […] Sometimes it’s really – if it is really interesting or important content I really need to know then I would try to talk to them again, or ‘sorry I don’t understand’ or maybe just ‘sorry’. Or maybe just say, ‘my English is not very good, can you speak slowly sometimes’. Usually though, they just leave me when I’m still thinking. It’s hopeless.

(Stella, 21, China)

The majority of international interviewees described similar feelings. These kinds of uncomfortable social interactions in the classroom can breed negative emotions that block development of the kind of positive cycle, described by Kudo and Simkin (2003), where confidence arises from successful interactions. The debilitating effect of these negative emotions meant that Stella was not just unwilling, but actually unable, to mix with local students. She did not believe that she had the ability or language skills to maintain an interaction with her local peers. In the absence of explicit social guidance, the local students set the pace for the interaction and Stella was unable to keep up.

Local interviewees also frequently reported that negative emotions impeded social inclusivity and relationship-building with their international peers. However, as noted above, this was more often rooted in annoyance than fear, as the following response from Faith illustrates.

Interviewer:     So when you communicate with international peers, do you have any trouble?

Faith:                  Sometimes. When they can’t speak back to me, I feel a bit agitated because if I ask someone a question I’d like them to answer. I’d try to do the same thing if they were to ask me a question. But sometimes, I know it’s difficult for them to speak English. But, still, I get annoyed that they don’t answer back.

Interviewer:     Yeah. What do you think the problem is, that they don’t understand or they can’t respond?

Faith:                  I know they understand. I think it’s just because they can’t respond.

(Faith, Indonesian-born longtime resident of Australia, 19)

Although Faith understood the challenge of communicating in a second language, her frustration persisted. While she was often observed initiating talk with international students, she did not slow her speech, use plain English or allow a longer response time than she would with local peers. She interacted with peers who were using English as an additional language in the same way that she did peers with English as a first language, expected similar outcomes and was disheartened when this did not happen. The persistent ‘annoyance’ emotions reported by Faith and other local students seems, therefore, to arise from a lack of unrealistic expectations, communicative strategies, guidance and emotional understanding needed for successful intercultural communication.

Conclusion

Regardless of their backgrounds, the vast majority of students interviewed for this case study articulated the importance of social inclusion in a surprisingly similar way and described it as crucial in helping everyone in the class share their opinions, expand their knowledge, build friendships and actively participate in class. They described causal relationships between the level of inclusion or isolation they felt in particular classes to their academic success and satisfaction with that learning experience. In line with Burdett and Crossman (2011), for these students, social, cultural and academic learning were closely linked and should be considered as a conceptual whole because the process of acquiring, constructing and imparting knowledge is accomplished through social interactions.

We found, however, that left to themselves, the students had difficulty mixing, consistent with research that points to the sparseness of interactions between students from diverse backgrounds (Benzie, 2010; Rosenthal et al., 2006). As several studies have shown, international students mostly inhabit a ‘different world’ to local students and are dismayed at the lack of opportunities to forge meaningful intercultural relationships (Burdett & Crossman, 2011, p.60; also see Yates & Wahid, 2013; Zhang & Brunton, 2007). What became apparent in this case study was that students’ perceptions of there being limited opportunities to mix were at odds with the reality of the situation, in which opportunities were surprisingly frequent, particularly at the beginning of the semester. The true problem was that opportunities rarely evolved into genuine sustained interactions, often because strong negative emotions underpinned students’ reluctance to operate outside of their comfort zone. Once small groups based on national background coalesced in these classes, the social divisions between the groups expanded and mixing became increasing less frequent.

Often overlooked in the literature, learner emotions were found to be central to the issues and solutions of social inclusion and intercultural mixing, which in turn affect content-learning and students’ satisfaction with their educational experience more generally. In many cases, despite an initial interest and willingness to take up opportunities to mix, the students found the experiences too emotionally-taxing. In line with Tananuraksakul and Hall’s (2011) findings, ineffective intercultural interactions had a marked impact on students’ psychological well-being. Without guidance, extreme emotions associated with failed attempts at mixing were even, sometimes, debilitating. As emotions associated with intercultural interactions became increasingly negative, the students’ abilities to take up opportunities changed in an interesting way: from willing, to unwilling to unable. An interesting split was noted in this study, where international students often cited ‘fear’ emotions and local students named ‘annoyance’ emotions as hindrances to successful intercultural interactions and relationship-forming.

A self-perpetuating cycle became evident: as students aggregated into culturally similar groups and became increasing self-contained, opportunities to mix decreased and the isolated groups were more often described by others as exclusive and non-inviting. In order to create a more positive cycle, it is urged that tutors take responsibility to ‘set the scene’ early in the course and support students “to develop confidence in interacting with other peers from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds” (Arkoudis et al., 2012, p.12). This can be done through small, controlled interactive activities, in which power positions and the role of ‘expert’ are shared equally (Cruickshank et al., 2012) or through larger collaborative tasks where expectations, ground rules and procedures for intercultural interactions are discussed and reflected upon regularly (Campbell, 2012). It can also be done by bringing ‘mindfulness’ to classroom interactions, where students become aware of their own developing intercultural communication skills and the impact their words and actions have on their peers (Harrison & Peacock, 2012). It is important to all of these approaches that tutors support, manage and make explicit how to create, take up and sustain intercultural interaction in an emotionally conscientious way.

As priorities shift, with a strong emphasis now on social inclusion, it is crucial that learner emotion is understood as underpinning and intrinsically entwined in all social practices in the classroom. As it is central to many of the persistent social issues associated with internationalisation, it is also imperative to their solutions. The challenge is to bring emotion to the fore of the teaching and learning experience in order to help students normalise, articulate, work through, share and be aware of negative emotions in themselves and their peers. Through this process and the accompanying shift in pedagogy, practitioners and students alike are empowered at the classroom level to make substantial and meaningful contributions to the realisation of the potential benefits of the internationalisation of education.

References

Aberson, C., & Haag, S. (2007). Contact, perspective taking, and anxiety as predicators of stereotype endorsement, explicit attitudes, and implicit attitudes. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 10(2), 179-201.

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2011). Australian Social Trends December 2011: International Students. cat. no. 4102.0. Sydney: Commonwealth of Australia Retrieved from http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/subscriber.nsf/LookupAttach/4102.0Publication14.12.113/$File/41020_International_Dec2011.pdf.

Australian Education International. (2012). Export income to Australia from international student activitiy in 2011-2012. Canberra: Australian Government Retrieved from https://aei.gov.au/research/Research-Snapshots/Documents/Export%20Income%202011-12.pdf.

Arkoudis, S., Watty, K., Baik, C., Yu, X., Borland, H., Chang, S., Lang, I, Lang, L. & Pearce, A. (2012). Finding common ground: enhancing interaction between domestic and international students in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 18(3), 222-235.

Bean, J. P., & Eaton, S. B. (2000). A Psychological Model of College Student Retention. In J. M. Braxton (Ed.), Reworking the Student Departure Puzzle (pp. 48-61). Nashville: Vanderbuilt University Press.

Benzie, H. J. (2010). Graduating as a ‘native speaker’: international students and English language proficiency in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 29(4), 447-459.

Birrell, B. (2006). Implications of low English standards among overseas students at Australian universities. People and Place, 14(4), 53-64.

Bretag, T. (2007). The emperor’s new clothes: Yes, there is a link between English language competence and academic standards. People and Place, 15(1), 13-21.

Brockbank, A., & McGill, I. (2007). Facilitating Reflective Learning in Higher Education (2nd ed.): McGraw Hill: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.

Brewer, A., & Zhao, J. (2010). The impact of a pathway college on reputation and brand awareness for its affiliated university in Sydney. International Journal of Educational Management, 24(1), 34-47.

Burdett, J., & Crossman, J. (2011). “Checking the Pulse” The international student experience and social engagement across Australian universities: reflecting on AUQA feedback to Cycle 2 reports. Journal of International Education in Business, 3(1/2), 53-67.

Burgess, R. G. (1984). An Introduction to Field Research. London: Routledge.

Campbell, N. (2012). Promoting Intercultural Contact on Campus: A Project to Connect and Engage International and Host Students. Journal of Studies in International Education, 16(3), 205-227.

Campbell, J., & Li, M. (2007). Asian students’ voices: An empirical study of Asian students’ learning at a New Zealand university. Journal of Studies in International Education, 12(4), 375-396.

Cartney, P., & Rouse, A. (2006). The emotional impact of learning in small groups: highlighting the impact on student progression and retention. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(1), 79-91.

Crossman, J. (2008). A “different way”: Student perspectives on international and cultural learning. Employment Relations Record, 8(2), 48-65.

Cruickshank, K., Chen, H., & Warren, S. (2012). Increasing international and domestic student interaction through group work: a case study from the humanities. Higher Education Research & Development, 31(6), 797-810.

Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. (2009). Good practice principles for English language proficiency for international students in Australia. Canberra.

Duff, P. A. (2008). Case Study Research in Applied Linguistics. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Eller, A., Abrams, D., & Zimmerman, A. (2004). University of Kent-British Council Longitudinal Attitude Survey: The Experience of International Students in Britain (Time 2). Canterbury: University of Kent.

Fitzsimmons, P., & Lanphar, E. (2011). When there’s love inside there’s a reason why: Emotion as the core of authentic learning in one middle school classroom. Learning Literacy: The Middle Years, 19(2), 35-40.

Freeman, T. M., Anderman, L. H., & Jensen, J. M. (2007). Sense of Belonging in College Freshmen at the Classroom and Campus Levels. The Journal of Experimental Education, 75(3), 203-220.

Fried, L. (2011). Teaching teachers about emotion regulation in the classroom. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 36(3), 117-127.

Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.

Harrison, N., & Peacock, N. (2010). Cultural distance, mindfulness and passive xenophobia: using Integrated Threat Theory to explore home higher education students’ perspectives on ‘internationalisation at home’. British Educational Research Journal, 36(6), 877-902.

Kimmel, K., & Volet, S. (2012). University Students’ Perceptions of and Attitudes Towards Culturally Diverse Group Work: Does Context Matter? Journal of Studies in International Education, 16(2), 157-181.

Kudo, K., & Simkin, K. A. (2003). Intercultural friendship formation: The case of Japanese students at an Australian university. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 24(2), 91-114.

Ladd, P., & Ruby R. (1999). Learning Style and Adjustment Issues of International Students. Journal of Education for Business, 74(6), 363.

Linnenbrink, E. A., & Pintrich, P. R. (2002). Motivation as an enabler for academic success. School Psychology Review, 31(3), 313-327.

Mak, A., & Kennedy, M. (2012). Internationalising the Student Experience: Preparing Instructors to Embed Intercultural Skills in the Curriculum. Innovative Higher Education, 37(4), 323-334

Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative Content Analysis Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1.

Montgomery, C., & McDowell, L. (2009). Social networks and the international student experience: A community of practice? Journal of Studies in International Education, 13(4), 455-466.

Mortiboys, A. (2012). Teaching with emotional intelligence: a step-by-step guide for higher and further education professionals. New York: Routledge.

Murray, N. L. (2010). Conceptualising the English language needs of first year university students. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 1(1), 55-64.

Popov, V., Brinkman, D., Biemans, H. J. A., Mulder, M., Kuznetsov, A., & Noroozi, O. (2012). Multicultural student group work in higher education: An explorative case study on challenges as perceived by students. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 36(2), 302-317.

Rosenthal, D. A., Russell, J., & Thomson, G. (2007). Social connectedness among international students at an Australian university. Social Indicators Research, 84(1), 71-82.

Smart, D., Volet, S., & Ang, G. (2000). Fostering social cohesion in universities: Bridging the cultural divide.

Summers, J. J., & Svinicki, M. D. (2007). Investigating classroom community in higher education. Learning and Individual Differences, 17(1), 55-67.

Summers, M., & Volet, S. (2008). Students’ attitudes towards culturally mixed groups on international campuses: impact of participation in diverse and non-diverse groups. Studies in Higher Education, 33(4), 357-370.

Tananuraksakul, N., & Hall, D. (2011). International students’ emotional security and dignity in an Australian context: An aspect of psychological well-being. Journal of Research in International Education, 10(2), 189-200.

Volet, S. E., & Ang, G. (2012). Culturally mixed groups on international campuses: an opportunity for inter-cultural learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 31(1), 21-37.

Volet, S., & Mansfield, C. (2006). Group Work at University: Significance of Personal Goals in the Regulation Strategies of Students with Positive and Negative Appraisals. Higher Education Research and Development, 25(4), 341-356.

Volet, S. E., & Wosnitza, M. (2004). Social affordances and students’ engagement in cross-national online learning: An exploratory study. Journal of Research in International Education, 3(1), 5-29.

Ward, C., Masgoret, A., & Gezentsvey, M. (2009). Investigating attitudes toward international students: Program and policy implementations for social integration and international education. Social Issues and Policy Reviews, 14, 79-102.

Yates, L. & Wahid, R. (2013) Challenges to Brand Australia: international students and the problem with speaking. Higher Education Research and Development.

Zhang, Z., & Brunton, M. (2007). Differences in living and learning: Chinese international students in New Zealand. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(2), 124-140.

Appendix. Interview participants

This academic article was accepted for publication in the International HETL Review (IHR) after a double-blind peer review involving four independent members of the IHR Board of Reviewers and one revision cycle. Accepting editor: Dr. Charlynn Miller (Federation University Australia), Senior Editor, International HETL Review.

Suggested citation:

Willoughby-Knox, B., Yates, L. (2015). The emotional dimension of ‘mixing’ in an internationalised classroom: A pathway program case study. International HETL Review, Volume 5, Article 1, URL: https://www.hetl.org/academic-articles/the-emotional-dimension-of-mixing-in-an-internationalised-classroom-a-pathway-program-case-study

Copyright 2015 Brie Willoughby-Knox and Lynda Yates

The authors assert their right to be named as the sole authors of this article and to be granted copyright privileges related to the article without infringing on any third party’s rights including copyright. The authors assign to HETL Portal and to educational non-profit institutions a non-exclusive licence to use this article for personal use and in courses of instruction provided that the article is used in full and this copyright statement is reproduced. The authors also grant a non-exclusive licence to HETL Portal to publish this article in full on the World Wide Web (prime sites and mirrors) and in electronic and/or printed form within the HETL Review. Any other usage is prohibited without the express permission of the author(s).

Disclaimer

Opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors, and as such do not necessarily represent the positions of other professionals or any institution. By publishing this article, the authors affirms that any original research involving human participants conducted by the authors and described in the article was carried out in accordance with all relevant and appropriate ethical guidelines, policies and regulations concerning human research subjects and that where applicable a formal ethical approval was obtained.