a dissertation submitted to the graduate division of …€¦ · saiful rizal marali dissertation...
TRANSCRIPT
THE PERSISTENCE OF SOUTHEAST ASIAN MALAY STUDENTS
STUDYING IN HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS ABROAD:
A GROUNDED THEORY STUDY
A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF HAWAIʻI, AT MĀNOA IN PARTIAL FULFILMMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPY
IN
EDUCATION
May 2020
By
Saiful Rizal Marali
Dissertation Committee:
Chris M. Lucas, Chairperson
Erin Kahunawaikaʻala Wright
Nicole Alia Salis Reyes
Masitah Shahrill
Marie K. Iding
Keywords: Malay students, student persistence, student success
ii
Dedication
Dedicated to my late father-in-law, Pehin Dato Sulaiman, who inspired me to do my best.
Terima kasih buat isteri tercinta, Halimahtun Saadiah, wanita yang telah Allah takdirkan
untuk menjadi ibu kepada anak-anak tersayang, Raiyan Muqri dan Kiana Khaylila. Ada yang
selalu mendoakanmu setiap saat, sehingga ia lupa mendoakan dirinya sendiri. Terima kasih buat
bonda yang dikasihi Hajah Zainah Ismail yang selalu mengerti akan hati ketika yang lain tidak
memahami. Terima kasih ayahanda, Haji Marali Haji Md Tahir atas segala jasamu dan
semangat yang telah engkau berikan. Terima kasih adik-adikku atas semua kebaikan kamu dan
selalu ada untukku.
iii
Acknowledgements
This dissertation would not be possible without the support, guidance, and
encouragement of my academic advisor, Dr. Chris Lucas. I cannot thank you enough for your
understanding and dedication to me, ensuring I stayed on track during my doctoral program at
the University of Hawaiʻi, Mānoa. You are an inspirational professor and role model.
I want to express my deepest appreciation to the members of my dissertation committee:
Dr. Erin Kahunawaikaʻala Wright, Dr. Nicole Reyes, Dr. Masitah Shahrill, and Dr. Marie Iding.
I am sincerely grateful for the excellent feedback and insights you have given to improve this
dissertation, and the time you all spent with me to make this dissertation go well.
I am full of gratitude to Dr. Juliana Shak at Universiti Brunei Darussalam and Mohd.
Ruzaini Mohd Saiffulah at the Scholarship Section, Ministry of Education who helped me to
recruit study participants, which was pivotal during my data collection process.
Thank you to Dr. Kim Small, my program advisor at the East-West Center, Honolulu. I
am thankful for your support and direction throughout my four years as an East-West Center
student participant.
There are many good friends at the University of Hawaiʻi, Mānoa who have helped and
cheered me along the way, especially when times get tough. I am deeply grateful to these
awesome people: Muzamil, Seung, Ling Chih, Amali, Rafidzah, Mila, JP, Chester, Anis,
Shintaro, and Desi. Thank you for the friendship and motivation to help me persevere.
And finally, I could never have pursued this degree without the professional support of
the incredible leaders at the Ministry of Education, Brunei: Pehin Dato Dr. Haji Abu Bakar bin
Haji Apong, Dato Paduka Dr. Haji Zulkarnain bin Hj Hanafi, and Dato Paduka Dr. Haji Junaidi
bin Haji Abd. Rahman.
iv
Abstract
This study bridges the gap in the literature by exploring the process of student persistence from
the viewpoint of international students, and those from the Southeast Asian (SEA) Malay ethnic
group. As one of the largest ethno-religious groups in the world, the SEA Malay culture is quite
unique from other Asian cultures. By employing Corbin and Strauss’ (2015) principles of an
evolved grounded theory approach to qualitative inquiry, this study discovered emerging
concepts and categories that were grounded in data and ultimately created a substantive theory
that explained the phenomenon. The following research question was answered: How do Malay
students from Southeast Asia persist to degree completion when enrolling in higher education in
the United Kingdom, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand? A purposeful theoretical
sample of 28 Malay participants from Brunei were engaged to explore the prevalent problems
and challenges they encountered and the strategies they utilized while studying abroad. This
study demonstrated that SEA Malay students experienced inherently intertwined challenges and
stressors as well as complex emotional processes that affected their persistence levels. The
Model of the Persistence of Southeast Asian Malay Students Studying Abroad was constructed
as a result of this study. Clear links were established between students’ persistence processes and
institutional practices of cultural relevance and cultural responsiveness in explaining the success
of SEA Malay students in higher education institutions abroad. Important implications include
the creation of innovative and transformative strategies that are culturally relevant and culturally
responsive to diverse student populations, particularly the international Malay student group
from Southeast Asia.
Keywords: Malay students, student persistence, student success
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................ 1
Purpose of the Study ................................................................................................................... 1 Definition of Terms..................................................................................................................... 2
Significance of the Study ............................................................................................................ 3 Cultural differences ................................................................................................................. 4 Lack of adequate literature...................................................................................................... 7 Gaps in educational outcomes ................................................................................................ 8
The Malay World ........................................................................................................................ 9
Higher education in SEA ...................................................................................................... 10 Study Abroad ............................................................................................................................ 14 Globalization of Higher Education ........................................................................................... 15
International students ............................................................................................................ 16 Global enrollment trends....................................................................................................... 17 Challenges faced by international students ........................................................................... 17
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 19
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................. 21
Student Persistence, Retention, and Attrition ........................................................................... 22 Minority student persistence ................................................................................................. 26 International student persistence ........................................................................................... 29
Conceptual Models of Student Persistence ............................................................................... 32 Spady’s (1970) sociological model of the dropout process .................................................. 32
Tinto’s (1975, 1987, 1993) longitudinal model of student departure ................................... 34 Bean’s (1980) model of student attrition .............................................................................. 39
Pascarella’s (1980) student-faculty informal contact model ................................................ 42 Astin’s (1984) theory of student involvement ...................................................................... 45 Bean and Metzner’s (1985) model of nontraditional student attrition .................................. 46
Cabrera, Nora, and Castaneda’s (1993) integrated model of student retention .................... 48 Museus’ (2014) culturally engaging campus environments (CECE) model ........................ 50
A Synthesis of the Conceptual Models ..................................................................................... 55 Malay Students.......................................................................................................................... 57
Ethnoreligious identity .......................................................................................................... 59
English language competency............................................................................................... 62 Learning patterns .................................................................................................................. 63
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 64
CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................. 66
Qualitative Approach to Inquiry ............................................................................................... 66 Grounded Theory ...................................................................................................................... 67 Setting and Context ................................................................................................................... 70
The participants ..................................................................................................................... 72 The study sites....................................................................................................................... 73
Data Collection ......................................................................................................................... 73 Data analysis ............................................................................................................................. 76
Initial coding: Open .............................................................................................................. 76
vi
Intermediate coding: Axial ................................................................................................... 78
Advance coding: Selective .................................................................................................... 79
Memoing and Diagramming ..................................................................................................... 80 Role of the Researcher .............................................................................................................. 81 Trustworthiness ......................................................................................................................... 82 Limitations ................................................................................................................................ 84
CHAPTER 4. FINDINGS AND ANALYSES .......................................................................... 86
Description of the Sample ......................................................................................................... 86 Results of Data Analysis ........................................................................................................... 89 Open Coding ............................................................................................................................. 90 Axial Coding ............................................................................................................................. 92 Selective Coding ....................................................................................................................... 93
Theme One: Pre-Entry Inputs ................................................................................................... 95 Ethnicity, age, and home country ......................................................................................... 95
Secondary education background ......................................................................................... 96 Cultural values ...................................................................................................................... 98
Aspirations .......................................................................................................................... 101 Pre-departure expectations .................................................................................................. 103
Theme Two: Transition into New Culture .............................................................................. 106
Housing ............................................................................................................................... 108 Social connections .............................................................................................................. 112
Language problems ............................................................................................................. 122 Dietary needs ...................................................................................................................... 126 Goal setting ......................................................................................................................... 131
Academic adjustment .......................................................................................................... 133
Theme Three: Campus Environments .................................................................................... 135 Cultural familiarity.............................................................................................................. 136 Culturally validating environments..................................................................................... 139
Collectivist cultural orientations ......................................................................................... 144 Humanized educational environments ................................................................................ 146
Opportunities for meaningful cross-cultural engagement ................................................... 149
Proactive philosophies ........................................................................................................ 154 Availability of holistic support ........................................................................................... 156 Multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary approaches to learning .......................................... 158 Scaffolding academic transition .......................................................................................... 160
Theme Four: Clinical Placement and Internship Environments ............................................. 162
Burnout and mental exhaustion .......................................................................................... 163
Quality of supervisory relationship ..................................................................................... 167
Cultural biases ..................................................................................................................... 169 Work environment adjustment ............................................................................................ 170 On-campus tutor support..................................................................................................... 172
Theme Five: Academic and Psychological Outcomes ............................................................ 174 Academic performance ....................................................................................................... 174
Mental health wellbeing ...................................................................................................... 175 Commitment to goals .......................................................................................................... 178 Sense of belonging .............................................................................................................. 180
vii
The Proposed Grounded Theory ............................................................................................. 181
Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 185
CHAPTER 5. IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSION ........................................................ 186
Discussion of Key Findings .................................................................................................... 186 Expected findings................................................................................................................ 187 Summary of findings........................................................................................................... 187 Struggling with clinical placements .................................................................................... 188
Leveraging academic success on institutional practices of cultural relevance and cultural
responsiveness..................................................................................................................... 191 Surviving transition shock .................................................................................................. 193 Achieving success through self-efficacy and grit ............................................................... 195 Religious commitment ........................................................................................................ 198
Theoretical Implications ......................................................................................................... 199 Recommendations for Future Research .................................................................................. 201
Recommendations for Future Practice .................................................................................... 205 Implications for clinical placement ..................................................................................... 205
Implications for faculty and student affairs ........................................................................ 206 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................. 209
APPENDIX A: AGREEMENT TO PARTICIPATE ............................................................ 211
APPENDIX B: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL .......................................................................... 214
APPENDIX C: IRB APPROVAL ........................................................................................... 217
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 218
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Description of Sample. A Summarized Profile Participants ........................................... 88
Table 2. Summary of The Three Processes and Outcomes of Coding: Open Coding, Axial
Coding, and Selective Coding....................................................................................................... 90
Table 3. List of 153 Concepts Generated During Open Coding ................................................... 91
Table 4. List of Fourteen Categories Generated During Open Coding ........................................ 92
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. The clusters of ten world cultures (House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorfman, & Gupta, 2004) 5
Figure 2. Percentage of Malaysian international students in Australia, the United Kingdom, and
the United States from 2011-2015 .............................................................................. 12
Figure 3. Percentage of Bruneian international students in Australia, the United Kingdom, and
the United States from 2011-2015 .............................................................................. 13
Figure 4.Top five countries of origin of international students in the United States during the
2016/2017 academic year ........................................................................................... 18
Figure 5. Top five countries of origin of international students in the United Kingdom during the
2016/2017 academic year ........................................................................................... 18
Figure 6. Top five countries of origin of international students in Australia during the 2016/2017
academic year.............................................................................................................. 19
Figure 7. The explanatory sociological model of the dropout process (Spady, 1970) ................. 33
Figure 8. The model of student departure (Tinto, 1975, 1987, 1993)........................................... 36
Figure 9. The causal model of student attrition (Bean, 1980) ...................................................... 41
Figure 10. The student-faculty informal contact model (Pascarella, 1980). ................................. 44
Figure 11. The model of nontraditional student attrition (Bean & Metzner, 1985). ..................... 47
Figure 12. The integrated model of student retention (Cabrera, Castañeda, & Nora, 1993 ......... 49
Figure 13. The culturally engaging campus environment (CECE) model of student success
(Museus, 2014) ........................................................................................................... 53
Figure 14. The processes of theoretical sampling (Corbin and Strauss, 2015) ............................. 71
Figure 15. Schematic representation of the Grounded theory procedures (Corbin & Strauss,
2015) ........................................................................................................................... 75
Figure 16. Interrelated processes of data collection and data analysis in grounded theory. (Corbin
& Strauss, 2015).......................................................................................................... 77
Figure 17. Relationships between categories and concept or codes generated by axial coding ... 93
Figure 18. Theoretical themes that make up the emergent theoretical model .............................. 94
x
Figure 19. The Final Theoretical Model ....................................................................................... 95
Figure 20. The substantive Model of The Persistence of Southeast Asian Malay Students
Studying Abroad ....................................................................................................... 182
1
Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION
Purpose of the Study
The global trend of increasing international students’ enrollment has brought about
increased revenue, diversity, and cross-cultural interactions for higher education institutions. As
colleges and universities continue to recruit more international students, they will need to
develop initiatives and strategies that are effective in building relationships with students from
diverse cultural backgrounds, nationalities, and religions. It is critical that higher education
institutions and student affairs professionals develop culturally competent skills, have a global
mindset, and think beyond borders to ensure the success of their international students. The
purpose of this exploratory qualitative study is to better understand the process of student
persistence from the viewpoint of international students particularly those from the Southeast
Asian (SEA) Malay ethnic group. For this study, I will define student persistence as the intent of
students to continue their academic enrollment in institutions of higher education from semester-
to-semester until the successful completion of their undergraduate degree programs. The study
will be guided by the research question: How do Malay students from Southeast Asia persist to
degree completion when enrolling in higher education in the United Kingdom, the United States,
Australia, and New Zealand?
While there are numerous studies that reported persistence challenges amongst the two
largest minority groups in the United States (i.e., Hispanics and African Americans), and the
international student group from China (Poyrnzli & Grahame, 2007), no study has reported the
persistence of SEA Malay students as a subgroup. Much of the research evidence that had been
offered in support of traditional student persistence theories came solely from samples of
domestic students in the United States. Little research had specifically examined student
2
persistence in relation to other racial and ethnic groups from outside the United States. This
study will bridge the gap in the literature by providing a new theoretical model or framework that
describes how Malay students from Southeast Asia navigate the challenges and obstacles they
face when studying in countries that have dissimilar cultures and systems from their own.
Findings of this study will have strong implications for higher education administrators and
faculty members when designing support initiatives that target specific racial groups particularly,
SEA Malay students.
Definition of Terms
Culture
The learned beliefs, values, rules, norms, symbols, and traditions that are common to a
group of people (Gudykunst & Ting-Toomey, 1988).
Foreign Student
A non-citizen enrolled at an institution of education outside their home country, but who
have not necessarily crossed a border to study (OECD, 2006).
Globalization
The process involving the increased interchange of products, services, knowledge,
information, and human resource across territorial boundaries (Robins, 2003).
Internationalization
The process of integrating an international, intercultural, or global dimension into the
purpose, functions or delivery of postsecondary education (Knight, 2003).
International Students
Students crossing borders for the specific purpose of studying (OECD, 2006).
3
Malay Students
Students belonging to the Austronesian ethnic group from Southeast Asia, the Malays.
The 33 million Malays of Southeast Asia (SEA) is a major ethnoreligious group that share a
great deal in terms of history, cultural identity, religious foundations, and philosophical values.
They speak Malay as their native language, profess Islam as their religion, and are historically
ruled by different Malay sultanates.
Student Persistence
The intent of students to continue their academic enrollment in institutions of higher
education from semester-to-semester until the completion of their undergraduate or graduate
degree programs.
Study Abroad
Short-term programs, long-term programs, service-learning programs, and international
internships created by higher education institutions as part of their internationalization strategy to
provide opportunities for students to attend educational programs in foreign countries.
Significance of the Study
Education in a new cultural context can be a rich and exciting, but challenging,
experience. International students arrive with their own particular cultural experiences and have
to engage with their new foreign institutions, which have particular practices and expectations
around teaching and learning. Existing literature indicates that international students’ persistence
in higher education is dependent on their adjustment skills and abilities to navigate different
cultural values, assumptions, knowledge, and commitments. However, empirical research
investigating college student persistence amongst different racial and ethnic groups as well as
nationalities is poorly theorized. Streitwieser and Light (2017) stated,
4
Students’ self-trajectories in international experiences are a product of the multiple
identities they bring from their home cultures, the host country they are encountering and
their own human agency through which they have the capacity to act and to make choices
within the possibilities open to them. (p. 474)
The practical implications of this study will enable higher education professionals to recognize
the distinct differences found when engaging international Malay students from SEA. The
information acquired can be used to guide the creation of innovative and transformative
strategies to promote the success of the SEA Malay student population in higher education that is
supported by meaningful empirical data.
Cultural differences. Early theoretical models of students’ success such as Tinto’s
(1975, 1987, 1993) model of student departure minimized cultural differences and favored an
assimilation strategy, where students were encouraged to adapt to the dominant culture and
disassociate from their home culture. The exchanges that take place between faculty and students
from different cultural backgrounds, religions, and nationalities may lead to issues because of the
great variation in values, beliefs, attitudes, habits, and the views of the world they hold. For
example, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of a student’s presentation in detail in front
of the whole class is often appreciated in Western cultures where honesty is said to be more
valued than reputation. However, in Asian cultures where the concept of ‘saving face’ is a core
social value whereby honor and dignity are highly valued above others, this same approach may
be understood by a middle-eastern student as dishonoring, causing him to react in a
confrontational manner.
5
Figure 1. The clusters of ten world cultures (House, Hanges, Javidan, Dorfman, & Gupta, 2004).
Adapted from “Leadership: Theory and practice,” by P.G. Northouse, 2018, p.441. Copyright
Sage publications.
The SEA Malay culture is quite unique and different from other Asian cultures. This
study argues that the circumstances influencing the process of a SEA Malay student’s persistence
are complex whereby cultural and religious influences exert impacts that are more significant
than non-cultural factors. The individualist cultures that exist in the West that emphasize
autonomy, self-realization, personal initiative, and independence are much different from the
collectivist culture of SEA Malays where commitment to home, group loyalty, religious
6
affiliation, and interconnectedness of family, community, and society are highly emphasized.
Figure 1 presents the clusters of ten world cultures developed by The Global Leadership and
Organizational Behavior Effectiveness (GLOBE) Study of 62 Societies (House et al., 2004).
Based on the work of Hofstede (1980, 2001), Kluckhon and Strodtbeck (1961), McClelland
(1961), and Triandis (1996), GLOBE researchers identified ten distinct culture clusters: Anglo
(including the United States, Australia, England, and New Zealand), Southern Asia (including
Malaysia and Indonesia), Confucian Asia (including Singapore), Latin America, Nordic Europe,
Germanic Europe, Latin Europe, Sub-Saharan Africa, Eastern Europe, and Middle East.
Countries that belong to the Southern Asia cluster has one of the highest scores on humane
orientation and in-group collectivism. This means that in countries such as Malaysia, Indonesia,
and Thailand, there are societal emphases on strong family loyalty and deep concern for the
community. They remain open to new ideas, but family and religious affiliation are highly
regarded above all else.
In contrast, countries that belong to the Anglo cluster which includes the United States,
England, and Australia exhibit high scores in performance orientation and low scores in in-group
collectivism. American, British, and Australian campus environments, therefore, are expected to
manifest educational practices that are competitive and results oriented, and contradictory to the
Southern Asia cluster, be more individualistic and less attached to family and religion. Because
of this, SEA Malay students are likely to experience culture shock when transitioning into
significantly different and unfamiliar campus cultures in the United States, the United Kingdom,
or Australia. On the other hand, prolonged exposure and interactions with the pluralistic societies
of their host countries would enable them to develop Anglo leadership characteristics that are
less autocratic, autonomous, and less prone to face saving. For example, the human interactions
7
and relationships that international students experience in the West can have far-reaching and
long-term repercussions on their respective societies back home. Using assertive communication
and negotiation skills acquired during their time abroad, returning international students will
become more empowered to influence social change in their countries.
Lack of adequate literature. In the realm of higher education, the use of theoretical
models to explain student persistence and departure has considered both environmental factors
(Astin, 1984, 1999; Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005) and institutional factors (Bean, 1980; Rendón,
Jalomo, & Nora, 2000; Tierney, 1992). While the three main theoretical models of students’
success: (1) Tinto’s Model of Student Departure, (2) Astin’s Theory of Involvement, and (3)
Bean’s Theory of Student Attrition are most commonly utilized by higher education institutions
to guide practice, they were mainly developed based on the experiences of traditional American
college students. Hence, they fall short of addressing the persistence of students from different
ethnic and racial groups, including those from different nationalities who come from diverse
cultural, ethnic, and socioeconomic backgrounds. In addition, these theoretical models are
constrained by their focus on the behavioral competencies and cognitive attributes of the student
as an individual. In the case of Tinto’s Model of Student Departure, students’ prior habits and
values are seen as obstacles where students are encouraged instead to become the western
independent learner.
As a result of growing ethnic diversity, discussions on ethnicity and culture have
dominated U.S. higher education research literature research in recent years. In a pluralistic
society such as the United States, large differences still persist in Bachelor’s degree attainment
by ethnicity. Although attainment rates for Hispanics, African Americans, and Native Americans
are increasing, they remain far below those of white Americans (Zumeta, Breneman, Callan, &
8
Finney, 2012). While scholars have explored the mechanisms through which college students
persist in college, the growing body of student persistence research has often neglected the idea
that race, ethnicity, and nationality influence the ways students persist in higher of education.
Museus (2014) asserted that many of the traditional frameworks of college success (Astin 1984,
1999; Kuh et al. 2005; Tinto, 1975, 1987, 1993) do not “include a sufficient consideration of
racial and cultural context in its explanations of student success and therefore, do not sufficiently
reflect the racial and cultural realities faced by students of color in postsecondary education” (p.
200). In the case of international students, they do not represent a homogenous group and have
diverse needs that vary widely based on ethnic, cultural, and demographic factors (Russell,
Rosenthal, & Thomson, 2010). Therefore, the lack of consideration of race, ethnicity, and
nationality remains a limitation of current student persistence theories. Currently, there is no
theoretical framework to describe and assess college persistence behaviors of the ethnoreligious
Malays from SEA.
Gaps in educational outcomes. Despite the staggering increase in access to higher
education, gaps in educational outcomes between racial and ethnic groups continue to beset
education systems around the world (Attewell & Newman, 2010). In Brunei and Malaysia, where
Malays comprise the majority, and in Singapore, where they constitute the second largest ethnic
group, Malays are much more likely to fall behind in economic and academic achievement than
those from the Chinese and Indian ethnic groups. Tan and Ho (2001) emphasized that academic
preparation for college is important if Singapore is to see an increase in Malay student success in
higher education. Tan (2007) highlighted that while the minority Malays in Singapore have made
significant improvements in their educational achievements, they continue to lag behind in
educational performance behind other ethnic communities (i.e., the majority Chinese and
9
minority Indians). Statistics from 1980 to 2004 showed that Malays have not made relative gains
for admission to Singaporean polytechnics and universities compared to other ethnic groups
(Tan, 2007).
In multi-racial Malaysia, the government implements an affirmative action policy for its
tertiary education to address the economic imbalance that exist between Malays, Chinese, and
Indian ethnic groups. A quota of 55% of public university places (Ali, 2017) is currently set for
the politically dominant, but economically disadvantaged majority group (i.e., Malays), to gain
access and achieve greater success in higher education. Ali (2014) reported that there is a lack of
empirical studies on the contribution of individual, family, community or national factors on the
short-term and long-term effects on the educational outcomes of Malays in Singapore. The lack
of representation of Malay students’ voice in higher education research has not allowed
administrators and faculty to fully understand the diverse needs of Malay student population.
This study is motivated by the positive impacts that the findings will have on increasing the
higher education success of the underperforming Malays of SEA. Despite their challenges, the
majority of Malay students studying abroad are a highly select and motivated set of students.
They contribute different perspectives that are unique to their experiences, bring global
awareness into classroom discussions, and provide cultural diversity to the campus communities
abroad.
The Malay World
The Malay Archipelago is a geo-political region in Southeast Asia that crosses numerous
state borders encompassing Brunei, Malaysia, Singapore, parts of Indonesian Sumatera and
Kalimantan, Isthmian Thailand, and Cambodia. Collectively, this region is also known as the
‘Malay world’ due to it being predominantly inhabited by the Austronesian ethnic group, the
10
Malays. The 33 million Malays of Southeast Asia (SEA) is a major ethnoreligious group that
share a great deal in terms of history, cultural identity, religious foundations, and philosophical
values. They speak Malay as their native language, profess Islam as their religion, and are
historically ruled by different Malay sultanates. The fall of the Malacca Sultanate to the
Portuguese Empire in 1511 marked the start of the colonization era of the Malay world by the
Portuguese, Dutch, British, and Japanese until 1984. The twentieth century saw a period where
Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, and Brunei achieved outright independence from their Dutch
and British colonial rulers. When Malaysia was founded in 1957, Brunei opted at the last minute
not to join the Malaysian Federation and chose to remain as a British Protectorate. Brunei was
the last state in the Malay world to gain full independence in 1984. Malays now comprise the
majority population in multi-ethnic Malaysia and Brunei.
Higher education in SEA. Tertiary education in the Malay Archipelago has enrolled
SEA Malay students since the early-twentieth century at universities in Brunei, Indonesia,
Malaysia, and Singapore such as: University of Malaya, National University of Singapore,
University of Indonesia, and Universiti Brunei Darussalam. During the late 1900s and early
2000s, the emerging economies of Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore underwent rapid
growth driven by foreign capital and huge investments in human resource development. Aimed
at responding to their societal needs and labor market demands, Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, and
Singapore also experienced the sudden expansion of their higher education sectors in terms of
the number of tertiary institutions established, the size of institutions, and the number of students
enrolled. For these countries, the primary challenges are to find ways to improve higher
education access and quality. Although small private colleges and universities are growing in
numbers, higher education is considered as a core government service that is provided through
11
public institutions. There are now 152 public four-year universities throughout Brunei,
Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore that offer a variety of disciplines at undergraduate and
graduate levels.
Despite the rapid rise in size and growth of the domestic tertiary education systems in
SEA, Malay students continue to be attracted to Western universities particularly in the United
States, the United Kingdom, and Australia due to their technically superior quality in both
academic programs and research endeavors. Given the challenges of a global, knowledge-based
economy, SEA countries such as Malaysia and Brunei appear to need substantially more
university graduates than it is on track to produce. Changing demographics i.e., the rise of SEA’s
18-22 year old population and SEA’s strong economic growths continue to drive the demand for
tertiary education both domestically and overseas. In this manner, societal needs and labor
market demands for highly skilled and educated people will likely exceed existing projections in
the international enrollments of Malay students from SEA.
Before the currency crisis impacted Asia in the late 1990s, Malaysia was the number one
origin country for international students in the United Kingdom (British Council, 2012). Since
the early 2000s however, Malaysia has consistently been ranked as one of the top five countries
for sending students to the United Kingdom and Australia. Figure 2 and Figure 3 show the
percentages of international students from the two Malay-majority SEA countries; Brunei and
Malaysia. There continues to be a strong inclination by state leaders and policy makers in Brunei
and Malaysia to provide financial support to educate their students in niche academic disciplines
overseas. The Malaysian and Bruneian state governments allocate vast financial resources via
scholarships and student loans to encourage their students to pursue tertiary education in
prominent universities in Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Upon
12
completion of their studies, these students are expected to return home and contribute towards
socio-economic development of their respective countries. In 2014 and 2015, Australia has
overtaken the United Kingdom as the first-choice destination for Malaysian students (Figure 2).
For Bruneian students (Figure 3), the United Kingdom remains the main destination for higher
education due to the many similarities that exist between the Bruneian and the British education
systems, which makes it easier for Bruneians to gain entrance into British universities as opposed
to American universities. As members of the Commonwealth of Nations, both Brunei and
Malaysia also benefit from strong political and economic ties with the United Kingdom. This
adds extra appeal to the United Kingdom as a major higher education destination for Bruneians
and Malaysians.
Figure 2. Percentage of Malaysian international students in Australia, the United Kingdom, and
the United States from 2011-2015. Data sourced from http://data.uis.unesco.org/Index.aspx, the
UNESCO Institute for Statistics (n.d.).
Percentage of Malaysian International Students
Australia United Kingdom United States
Year
Per
centa
ge
13
Figure 3. Percentage of Bruneian international students in Australia, the United Kingdom, and
the United States from 2011-2015. Data sourced from http://data.uis.unesco.org/Index.aspx, the
UNESCO Institute for Statistics (n.d.).
Even though the costs associated with studying abroad are far from affordable for the
average Bruneian and Malaysian, Malay students desire to experience a different culture and
continue their studies in foreign tertiary institutions. In the United States, a four-year bachelor’s
degree at a public university costs on average U.S. $153,320 for the out-of-state student inclusive
of tuition, fees, room, and board (The College Board, n.d.). Comparatively, it would cost an in-
state student an average U.S. $87,800 to complete his or her four-year bachelor’s degree program
in the United States (The College Board, n.d.). Despite the high costs, students, parents, and
governments believe that it is necessary to invest in higher education. They expect high rates of
return on investment in terms of the annual earnings and social status advantages, the
Percentage of Bruneian
International Students Australia United Kingdom United States
Year
Per
centa
ge
14
development of human capital, and lower rates of social dysfunction graduates contribute to their
home countries.
Study Abroad
As part of their internationalization strategies, higher education institutions around the
world have expanded study abroad opportunities for their students that include short-term
programs, long-term programs, service-learning programs, and international internships. The
first officially credited study abroad program in the United States was launched in 1923 at the
University of Delaware where a group of eight American students participated in a six-week
educational journey to France (Lee, 2012). Since then, the United States has spent significant
amounts of time and money emphasizing intercultural learning by sending its students to foreign
institutions on study abroad programs. Open Doors (IIE, 2017) reported that 325,339 American
college students received credit for study abroad during the 2015/16 academic year and the
United Kingdom was the leading destination for American students.
In Brunei, among the many initiatives completed by its flagship university, Universiti
Brunei Darussalam (UBD) to attract the best Bruneian students was the introduction of a
compulsory ‘Discovery Year’ program in 2011. This program required all UBD’s third-year
undergraduate students to undergo study abroad, internship, incubation, and community outreach
programs in over 40 different countries at any one of its 122 foreign university partners. In 2015,
75% of UBD students chose to participate in the university’s study abroad programs in Malaysia,
Indonesia, Korea, the United Kingdom, Vietnam, Thailand, Japan, Philippines, Australia, and the
United States (Tan & Shahrill 2015). By 2015, UBD was ranked by the Asian Quacquarelli
Symonds (QS) University rankings as the top university in Asia for outbound student mobility
and third for inbound exchange.
15
Study-abroad programs provide broader education opportunities in countries where
access to higher education is limited and competitive (Altbach & Knight, 2007). A study
conducted by Malmgren and Galvin (2008) on three incoming freshman cohorts at the University
of Minnesota found that students who participated in study abroad also had high graduation
rates. Other research on study abroad have identified specific skills, competencies, perspectives,
and attributes acquired during study abroad opportunities such as developing language skills
(Douglas & Jones-Rikkers, 2001), experiencing personal growth (Hoffa, 2007), appreciation of
foreign cultures (Altbach & Knight, 2007; Kitsantas, 2004), increasing students’ marketability
(Ingraham & Peterson, 2004), contributing to global awareness and engagement (Murphy,
Sahakyan, Yonh-Yi, & Magnan, 2014), and helping students succeed in a global workplace
(Norris & Gillespie, 2009; Murphy et al., 2014). Tan and Shahrill (2015) outlined four main
benefits of studying abroad for Bruneian students: (1) improving employability, (2) forcing
students to be independent, (3) improving cultural competence and appreciation of other
religions, and (4) gaining a new language.
Globalization of Higher Education
Globalization and internationalization of higher education has caused an increased
movement of students globally, and also competition for, students and scholars across national
borders. The global economic, political, and societal trends of the 21st century has made
internationalization a main reform agenda for higher education institutions around the world.
Defined as “the process of integrating an international, intercultural, or global dimension into the
purpose, functions or delivery of postsecondary education” (Knight, 2003, p. 11), internalization
“has become an indicator for quality in higher education” (de Witt, 2011, p. 39). Knight (2004)
commented, “Internalization is changing the world of higher education, and globalization is
16
changing the world of internationalization” (p. 5). Higher education institutions continue to be
motivated by the ways that internationalization can enhance their international reputations,
enhance the intercultural understanding and skills of their national and international levels, and
enhance research and knowledge production through international and interdisciplinary
collaborations (Knight, 2004).
International students. The enriched learning environments and cultural disposition of
international universities offer developing countries in Asia and Africa access to a diverse range
of programs that meet their growing needs. According to the Organisation for Economic Co-
operation and Development (OECD, 2017), there were only 0.8 million international student
enrollments in tertiary education worldwide in 1975. As a result of globalization and
internationalization, this number increased significantly to 4.6 million in 2015 and is further
projected to almost double and reach eight million by 2025. The OECD (2017) data on
international students also showed that the largest number of international students are from Asia
(1.56 million in 2015). In addition, 75% of these students from Asia are only enrolled in colleges
and universities in the most popular three destinations for higher education i.e., the United States
(44%), Australia (16%), and the United Kingdom (15%) (OECD, 2017). Although countries like
Japan, Singapore, Malaysia, and South Korea are rapidly becoming main destinations for higher
education in Asia, the advantage of acquiring English language skills and the well-established
reputations of the universities in the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom often
make them more attractive to foreign students (Montgomery, 2010; OECD, 2011). Students also
believe that pursuing higher education in these countries will best prepare them for greater career
and life opportunities (Montgomery, 2010).
17
Global enrollment trends. China and India are forecasted to be the top sources of
foreign students by 2020, followed by Nigeria, Malaysia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey
(British Council, 2012). Global trends in international student mobility show that the United
States remains the primary destination for international students due to the superior quality,
rankings, and flexibility of American higher education institutions (Altbach, 2004; Farrugia &
Villareal, 2015). A total of 1,078,822 international students were enrolled in higher education
institutions in the United States during the 2016/17 academic year representing 5.3% of the total
U.S. enrollment (Project Atlas, 2017). The United Kingdom is consistently ranked second behind
the United States as a top international destination for higher education (Project Atlas, 2017).
Over 501,045 international students were enrolled in higher education institutions in the United
Kingdom in 2017 (Project Atlas, 2017). In Australia, the dramatic rise of international student
enrollment in its colleges and universities in the 1990s transformed higher education into
Australia’s third largest export industry (Reilly, 2012). By 2010, Australia had the highest
proportion per capita of international students in the world (AHRC, 2010). It is reported that in
2017, international students comprised 23.8% of all higher education enrollments in Australia
(Project Atlas, 2017). Figure 4, Figure 5, and Figure 6 show the top five nationalities of
international students enrolled in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia during
the 2016/2017 academic year.
Challenges faced by international students. Whilst bringing new opportunities,
globalization has also brought new values and social challenges to higher education and students
alike. International students come from over 185 countries from diverse cultural and ethnic
backgrounds. The challenges they experience while studying in their host countries would be
significantly different from the experiences of mainstream American, British, or Australian
18
Figure 4.Top five countries of origin of international students in the United States during the
2016/2017 academic year. Data sourced from the Institute of International Education (2017).
Figure 5. Top five countries of origin of international students in the United Kingdom during the
2016/2017 academic year. Data sourced from the UK Council for International Student Affairs,
UKCISA (2018).
350,755
186,267
58,663
52,611
27,065
0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000
China
India
South Korea
Saudi Arabia
Canada
Number of students
198,731
77,841
29,347
28,295
22,684
0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000
China
India
Brazil
Malaysia
Nepal
Number of students
19
Figure 6. Top five countries of origin of international students in Australia during the 2016/2017
academic year. Data sourced from The Department of Education and Training, Australian
Government (2017).
students. Prior research generally confirms that international students dropped out of their
programs in the United States due to different factors i.e., financial difficulties, cultural
differences, racial discrimination, unfamiliarity with the educational system, immigration
problems, housing accommodation, loneliness and homesickness, lack of social support, and
language difficulties (Andrade, 2007, 2008; Haiwan, Harlow, Maddux, & Smaby, 2006;
Hanassab, 2006; Hayes & Lin, 1994: Lee, 2010; Lee & Rice, 2007; Sumer, Poyrazli, &
Grahame, 2008). Despite these challenges, the number of international students increased
significantly from 2.1 million students in 2000 to 4.6 million in 2017 (Project Atlas, 2017).
Conclusion
This chapter introduces the study and establishes a need for research in the persistence of
the minority Southeast Asian Malay student population in foreign institutions outside of the
Malay Archipelago. While higher education institutions attempt to address the problems of
student retention and attrition, it is important to first understand that cultural differences between
91,215
17,405
17,115
16,745
16,745
0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 90,000 100,000
China
Malaysia
United States
India
Hong Kong
Number of students
20
different populations of students and learn how their interactions with institutions’ dominant
cultures shape their higher education experiences. International students bring with them diverse
beliefs, values, rules, norms, and traditions that are significantly different from those that exist in
the West. Because of their ethnoreligious identity, Malay students who come to study in colleges
and universities in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia will encounter
significant cultural and religious challenges that will affect their persistence behaviors and
decisions to withdraw. In the succeeding Chapter Two, a review of literature related to the study
are presented and is divided into three parts: (1) Student persistence, retention, and attrition, (2)
Conceptual models of student persistence, and (3) Southeast Asian Malay students. These topics
were selected to discover a common pattern that surrounds student persistence, retention, and
attrition in higher education.
21
Chapter 2. LITERATURE REVIEW
This literature review sets the context for the study by covering an overview of topics
related to the concept of SEA Malay students’ persistence in higher education. First, I will
present a review of current literature on student persistence to articulate an understanding of the
complex issues around student retention and attrition. This section also describes research studies
that investigated the persistence of student groups that are of particular relevance to this study
i.e., the minority and international student populations. Second, the conceptual models of student
persistence will be examined. This section will demonstrate how the early persistence theories
such as Spady’s (1970) model of student attrition and Tinto’s (1975) theory of student departure
were advanced over time to include explanations on the success of non-traditional students (Bean
& Metzner, 1985) as well as racially and ethnically diverse student populations (Museus, 2014).
Although Corbin and Strauss (2015) advocated against the use of theoretical frameworks in
grounded theory studies, the conceptual models identified in this literature review will serve as a
foundational framework that will allow me to compare and contrast the concepts that I derived
from data during analysis. Making use of the conceptual models for comparative purposes will
enhance my ability to clearly discern the properties and dimensions of concepts.
Third, the characteristics of the population of interest i.e., Malay students from SEA, will
be discussed, examining their ethno-religious identity, cultural variations, learning patterns, and
English language competency. This will aid me in understanding the challenges and issues that
SEA Malay students may encounter when they attend colleges and universities as a minority
group. In grounded theory, it is impossible for the researcher to predetermine which concepts
will be most significant to the study before data has been collected and analyzed (Corbin &
Strauss, 2015). Corbin and Strauss (2015) highlighted that a literature review should not be
22
allowed to impede creativity when generating a theory. Hence, this literature review was mainly
used to compare and contrast the concepts derived from data and the theory that emerged at the
end of data analysis.
Student Persistence, Retention, and Attrition
Student persistence is a key measure of student success. In order to be successful in
college, students need to persist and complete their educational goals. According to Hagedorn
(2012), the terms persistence, retention, and attrition are often used interchangeably in higher
education literature. She defined retention as an institution’s ability to keep students enrolled
until completion of their degrees, hence, is widely used as an indicator for institutional success
(Hagedorn, 2012). At the same time, the term attrition can be referred to a student withdrawing
from a course, cancelling their program, or failing to re-enroll in the next semester (Beer &
Lawson, 2017). Therefore, the long-term goal of any college or university would be to increase
student persistence, retention, and reduce attrition. Amongst others, high retention, high
persistence, and low attrition are linked to higher institutional ranking, increased state
appropriations, more federal funds, and easier path to program accreditations (Thammasiri,
Delen, Meesad, & Kasap, 2014).
Interestingly, Oregon Tech Institute of Technology claimed that their success in
improving retention from 68.9% in 2012 to 79.5% in 2017 was achieved by putting aside
retention to focus on student persistence efforts (Berry, LaGreca, & Bruynzeel, 2018). Tinto
(2017) noted that when students are asked about issues concerning attrition, they would rather
speak about persisting instead of talking about the university’s ability to increase retention.
Oregon Tech addressed student persistence issues by effectively using consolidated data to
determine the causes of low retention amongst specific groups of students that included first-time
23
full time, part-time, and full-time transfer students. They assigned all first-year students with a
professional academic specialist to assist them with their transitions from high school to
university. During their first year, students worked with the academic specialists to create course
schedules, develop study skills, advance personal development, and to understand the relevant
academic- and/or personal-help resources that are available on campus. When they proceed to
their second year, students were then enrolled into a peer mentoring program where
communication was conducted almost entirely using fast and effective text messaging (Berry,
LaGreca, & Bruynzeel, 2018).
The issue of student attrition continues to have negative ramifications on the reputation
and revenue of higher education institutions around the world. In 2012, it was estimated that a
large public university in Australia would lose $23,000 whenever an international student failed
to return after the first year of a three-year undergraduate program (Grebennikov & Shah, 2012).
Grebennikov and Shah (2012) added that for the same university in 2008, full-time fee-paying
student first year attrition would result in a loss in fee income of over $1 million dollars. Schuh
and Gansemer-Topf (2012) estimated that a 20 percent first year attrition at a public university in
the United States would result in a net tuition loss of over $5.68 million dollars a year. The
authors claimed that the total tuition loss would increase significantly by over 65% to $17
million dollars a year if junior- and senior-year attritions were accounted for. In addition to loss
of income, high student attrition rates will have indirect repercussions, both immediate and long-
term, on the institution and country such as: (1) increased cost of hiring faculty and staff, (2)
increased cost of maintaining and upkeeping campus facilities, (3) inefficient utilization of
personnel and facilities, (3) less graduates to serve as benefactors for the institution, (4) reduced
24
growth in the intellectual capacity of a country’s human capital, (5) insufficient production of
skilled manpower (Grebennikov & Shah, 2012; Schuh and Gansemer-Topf, 2012)
Despite this global concern, comparing student attrition statistics across different
countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia can be problematical due
to the inconsistencies in the ways of measuring and reporting attrition across higher education
institutions (Hagedorn, 2012; Currie et al., 2014). For example, Australia’s Tertiary Education
Quality and Standards Agency, TEQSA (2017) defined attrition as “the ratio of first-year higher
education commencing students in a year who neither completed nor returned to study in the
following year” (p. 8) whereas the United Kingdom’s Higher Education Statistics Agency,
HESA (n.d.) reported attrition as “non-continuation following date of entry.” Nevertheless, the
United States seems to have the worst student attrition rate; about 40% of college students drop
out and do not complete their bachelor’s degree programs within six years of enrollment causing
universities to lose tens of billions of dollars in revenue each year (Aulck, Velagapudi,
Blumenstock, & West, 2016). In Australia, despite the considerable time, effort, and resources
allocated by universities to address their attrition problems, the rate of attrition across Australian
universities as a whole has shown an improvement of only 1% from 2001 and 2012 (Beer &
Lawson, 2017). Australia’s attrition remained relatively stable at a rate of around 15% in 2012,
2013, and 2014 (Beer & Lawson, 2017). While the United Kingdom’s non-continuation rate in
2016 remained relatively low at 6.4%, it has experienced a trend in rising drop out numbers for
the past three years (HESA, n.d.).
There are, indeed, extensive research, reports, studies, and documents that link a diverse
range of individual, environmental, institutional factors and the complex interplay that exist
between internal and external factors that cause students to drop out of their programs. Early
25
research (Bean, 1980; Bean & Metzner, 1985; Cabrera, Nora, & Castaneda, 1993; Pascarella,
1980; Spady, 1970; Tinto, 1975, 1987, 1993) modeled student persistence as a longitudinal
process where students enter higher education environments with a set of individual
characteristics that will influence their commitment to graduate. Grebennikov and Shah (2012)
reported that psychosocial, cognitive, and demographic predictors of student persistence that are
within the institution’s immediate ability to control and affect have received increasing attention
over the last decade. These predictors included factors such as social climate established on
campus, the academic, social, and financial support provided by the institution, student in-class
and out-of-class involvement in campus life, and frequent feedback provided to students about
their performance (Braxton et al., 2004; Gebrennikov & Skaines, 2008; Krause et al., 2005; Kuh,
Kinzie, & Whitt, 2005; Tinto & Pusser, 2006).
Findings from data collected involving 7,486 students from six Australian universities in
2008, 2009, and 2010 (Wilcoxson et al., 2011) indicated that factors related to student
persistence are generally university-specific and reflect both student characteristics and their
responses to the specific institutional culture and environment. An Australia study conducted on
2,085 students who left their university before the end of their first year of study, found six top
reasons why students withdrew: (1) course was not what students had expected, (2) employment
commitments, (3) timetable made it difficult to attend classes, (4) family pressures, (5) teaching
and learning methods were unmotivating, and (6) staff did not give enough feedback or
individual help.
More recently, Tinto (2017) described persistence as the motivation that allows students
to continue the pursuit of their academic goals despite the challenges that arises. A crucial part of
discerning students’ motivation to persist is to unravel how, when, and why students act or do no
26
act when faced with an academic obstacle (Day, Nakata, Nakata, & Martin, 2015). Tinto (2017)
identified three main forces that shape students’ motivation to persist: (1) self-efficacy i.e.,
students’ commitments in addressing goals, tasks, and challenges to achieve goal attainment, (2)
sense of belonging i.e., students’ perceptions of belonging to a specific group or community
within the institution and the commitment that serves to bind them to the community despite
obstacles they encounter, and (3) the curriculum i.e., students’ perceptions of the value of the
education in which they are partaking.
Minority student persistence. Motivation is even more crucial in influencing the
persistence of minority college students who come from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds
(Gloria, Castellanos, Lopez, & Rosales, 2005; Rodgers, 2008; Zusho, Pintrich, & Cortina, 2005).
For example, D’Lima, Winsler, and Kitsantas (2014) examined potential ethnic differences in the
motivational profiles of 591 students from a large, highly ethnically diverse university in the
United States. Their findings revealed that there are significant ethnic differences in first-year
student motivational profiles i.e. first-year Asian American students not only had the lowest level
of academic self-efficacy compared to African American and Caucasian students, they were also
“more performance goal oriented than Caucasian students, and showed a trend for being less
mastery oriented than several other ethnic groups” (D’Lima, Winsler, and Kitsantas, 2014, p.
352). Students who exhibited high performance goal orientations, but are low in other
motivational indicators, were more likely to perform poorly academically and are at risk of
dropping out of college (Hulleman, Schrager, Bodmann, & Harackiewicz, 2010). Hence,
culturally sensitive interventions that create a mastery-oriented learning environment can be used
to target self-efficacy across all college student populations (D’Lima, Winsler, & Kitsantas,
2014).
27
It is important to note that, apart from challenging the model minority stereotype of Asian
American students as problem-free, D’Lima, Winsler, and Kitsantas’ (2014) findings also
indicated that little is known about the various influences that facilitate or hinder the success of
Asian American students. A one-size-fits-all approach to addressing the issue of minority student
attrition may be inadequate on its own. Commonly viewed as a monolithic group who achieve
academic and occupational success, Asian Americans are often removed from the focus of
college completion discourse (Museus & Kiang, 2009). Similarly, Day, Nakata, Nakata, and
Martin, (2015) reported that there is a high propensity to cast Australian indigenous students as
“a homogenous cohort with collective or shared cultural characteristics, rather than as members
of a distinct but quite diverse cohort, with a range of individual interests, behaviors, approaches,
capacities, skills, and needs” (p. 505). The authors argued that the absence of sophisticated
understandings of the intra-diverse requirements of indigenous student success without requiring
them to relinquish their indigenous identities is particularly problematic given the current
Australian government’s emphasis on reducing the gaps that exist between indigenous and non-
indigenous Australians (Day, Nakata, Nakata, & Martin, 2015). In a recent study in the United
Kingdom, Cotton, Nash, and Kneale (2016), suggested that efforts on the areas listed below
could make a significant difference to the continuation rates of non-traditional and ethnic
minority students:
(1) Providing students with access to emotional and practical support both within and
outside the university;
(2) Establishing relationships with supportive and approachable tutors to address both
academic and non-academic issues;
(3) Providing adequate financial support and management;
28
(4) Establishing support networks of friends and family;
(5) Providing access to student support services such as care leaver service, student
disability service, and peer assisted learning;
(6) Improving sense of belonging by engaging students in extra-curricular activities; and
(7) Increasing the monitoring of student attendance and engagement.
As stated by Tinto (2017), in addition to risk factors such as social background, academic
preparation, and ethnicity, student persistence is also impacted by student’s sense of belonging;
the psychological connections they have to their institutions (Museus & Maramba, 2011). It is
critical for institutions to understand how students engage with their colleges and universities
and what processes facilitate students’ strong attachment to both their institutions and their study
programs. Museus (2014) posited that sense of belonging is shaped by positive faculty-student
interactions and is critical when predicting the success of students from diverse racial and ethnic
backgrounds. Social separation, seclusion, feelings of being out of place, being rejected, or not
fitting in with the cultures of their campuses will cause students to withdraw (Lyubomirsky,
Sheldon, & Schkade, 2005; Museus, 2014; O’Keefee, 2013; Tinto, 2017). Wolf, David, Butler-
Barnes, and Zile-Tamsen (2017) contended that socially marginalized student groups, such as
American Indians, Alaskan Natives and African Americans, are more likely than non-minority
groups to be unsure about their social belonging and their ability to socially integrate into
mainstream higher education institutions.
A sense of belonging is crucial, particularly in the first semester during the transition
from high school into a new and unfamiliar college campus (Wolf, David, Butler-Barnes, & Zile-
Tamsen, 2017). Because most minority students arrive with no connection on campus, they need
to begin to develop a sense of belonging by establishing and maintaining at least one relationship
29
with a person at the institution (O’Keefee, 2013; Wolf, David, Butler-Barnes, & Zile-Tamsen,
2017). Booker (2017) reported that: (1) African American female students had higher sense of
belonging when they had positive interpersonal exchanges with their professors, and (2)
authentic instruction i.e., professors’ use of real-world examples in their instructions, led to
increased engagement and affected students’ decision to persist. She went on reporting how
spokesperson pressure (i.e., students’ feelings of burden and frustration at being called out to
represent their race) and the racial microaggressions they experienced, whether intentional or
unintentional, made the most significant impacts on students’ decisions to withdraw from college
(Booker, 2017).
International student persistence. While there is a myriad of studies that examined the
first-year persistence experiences of college students, research that seeks to understand the
persistence of international students has been limited. Although completion rates for
international students in the United States are similar to those of domestic students (Andrade
2006a), several scholars agreed that international students encounter academic and social
transition problems that are distinctly different, more numerous, and more severe than those
endured by domestic students (Andrade, 2006b; Lee et al., 2004; Mesidor & Sly, 2016;
Wilcoxson et al., 2011). Prior research generally confirms that international students dropped out
due to academic challenges, financial difficulties, psychological and cultural challenges, medical
difficulties, racial discrimination, unfamiliarity with the educational system, immigration
problems, housing accommodation, loneliness and homesickness, lack of social support, and
language difficulties (Andrade, 2006b, 2007, 2008; Hassanab, 2006; Lee, 2010; Lee & Rice,
2007; Mesidor and Sly, 2016; Summer, Poyrazli, & Grahame, 2008).
30
Coming from more than 185 countries, international students are the most diverse student
group in the United States who represent a homogeneity of nationalities, races, ethnicities,
cultural norms and customs, physical appearances, and linguistic backgrounds (Hassanab, 2006).
Furthermore, they arrive with their own religion, political views, educational experiences, and
behavior patterns (Spencer-Rodgers, 2001) that can aggravate the adjustment issues they
encounter when moving to a foreign country and a new tertiary study environment (Owens &
Loomes, 2010). Wu et al. (2015) reported that the likelihood of international students
experiencing cultural shock is particularly high as they try to navigate unfamiliar communication
patterns, deal with different signs and symbols of social contact, and attempt to adapt to
interpersonal relationship patterns they are unaccustomed to. The immense cultural differences
they experience on campus can be complex, confusing, and stressful. As a result, many
international students may not experience a smooth transition into their new campus cultures.
Their transition process would often be marked by adverse psychological and physiological
changes as they are forced to quickly alter their lifestyle, food, dress code, and cultural identity
to assimilate into their new environments (Igoa, 1995). A 2010 study that involved first year
experiences of 2,240 students from nine universities in Australia revealed that the international
students represented a group that was most likely to have trouble fitting-in and be isolated on
campus (James, Krause, & Jennings, 2010). On the other hand, a number of authors have posited
that international students’ levels of satisfaction vary (Tan & Simpson, 2008; Van Hoof &
Verbeeten, 2005). Arambewela and Hall (2006) claimed that even though most international
students are likely to be satisfied with their experience of the core academic service (e.g.,
teaching staff, infrastructure, and course material), they might not be content with other services
31
such as living conditions, accommodation, safety, cultural activities, visa, and entry requirements
(Maria Cubillo, Sanchez, & Cervino, 2006).
Prior research substantiates the claim that universities are not putting enough effort to
help their international students assimilate into the academic and social system of their campuses
(Hagedorn & Ren, 2012; Poock, 2004; Sherry, Thomas, & Chui, 2010; Zhou, Frey, & Bang,
2011). Van Hook (2011) conveyed that American colleges and universities are often
ethnocentric, rendering international students as invisible, which consequently makes it difficult
for them to take into account the needs of their international student population. Thus, the
responsibility lies with colleges and universities to ensure that adequate resources and services
are made available and accessible to meet the diverse academic and social needs of their
international students (Akanwa, 2015). As stated by Andrade (2006a), “institutions cannot
simply admit foreign students and expect them to adjust to life in a new country and educational
system without the appropriate support and programming” (p. 133). From her studies on the
persistence of international students from Asia and the South Pacific, Andrade (2006a)
concluded that “balancing academic responsibilities, work, and social life, adjusting to the new
academic environment, and gaining confidence” (p. 3) were the major factors that influence
international students’ abilities to persist to graduation. She categorized these factors further into
six main themes (Andrade, 2008): (1) vision of the future i.e., the perceptions students have on
the value of their education; (2) home and educational background i.e., support from peers,
family, faculty, and staff (3) spirituality i.e., involvement in spiritual life; (4) validation i.e.,
integration into the campus culture; (5) attitudes and abilities i.e., such as open-mindedness,
motivation, study skills, and time management skills; (6) institutional engagement i.e.,
involvement in both in- and outside-classroom activities (Andrade, 2008). Russel, Rosenthal, and
32
Thomson (2009) narrowed these themes into two broad areas of international students’ needs i.e.,
(1) academic needs, and (2) physical and psychosocial health needs.
Conceptual Models of Student Persistence
The academic community has extensively researched student persistence, student
retention, and student attrition since the 1970s. Prior research by Spady (1970), Tinto (1975,
1987, 1993), Bean (1980), Pascarella (1980), Astin (1984), Bean and Metzner (1985), Cabrera,
Nora, and Castaneda (1993), Harper (2012), and Museus (2014) have explained individual,
social, and institutional risk factors that contribute to students’ decisions to leave their programs.
These models assist institutions to predict students who are at-risk of dropping out, develop plans
for interventions, and address the issues that cause students to leave. However, the theoretical
models developed through these studies have failed to take into account the persistence
experiences of international students studying abroad who arrive with prior social and cultural
experiences that are different from the middle-class domestic students for whom these models
were developed. This section provides an analytical review (in chronological order) of eight
most-cited conceptual models of student persistence that have gained the attention of researchers,
faculty, and student affairs professionals over the last five decades.
Spady’s (1970) sociological model of the dropout process. The earliest model of
student persistence was developed by William Spady in 1970 based on the work of Durkheim’s
(1950) theory of suicide that suggests one’s lack of social integration will increase his or her
likelihood of suicide. Spady’s (1970) sociological model is considered a seminal work on the
impact of student-college interactions on student persistence (Berger, Ramirez, & Lyons, 2012).
Spady (1970) posited student attrition as a conditional phenomenon that focused on the explicit
relationship between the individual attributes of students and those of the institutional
33
Figure 7. The explanatory sociological model of the dropout process (Spady, 1970). Adapted from “Dropouts from higher education:
An interdisciplinary review and synthesis,” by W.G. Spady, 1970 p. 79. Interchange, 1.
Friendship
Support
Grade
Performance Dropout
Decision
Social
Integration Satisfaction
Institutional
Commitment Intellectual
Development
Academic
Potential
Normative
Congruence
Family
Background
34
environment (Figure 7). According to Spady (1970), the interactions that occur between a
student’s attributes (i.e., dispositions, interests, attitudes, and skills) and his or her college
environment (i.e., the influences, expectations, and demands imposed by courses, faculty,
administrators, and peers) will affect how successful the student can assimilate into both the
academic and social subsystems of the college. The ability of the student to assimilate into these
subsystems will consequently determine whether the student continue to persist or not.
Spady (1970) identified two dominant factors that can have direct impacts on a student’s
decision to drop out from college: (1) grade performance, and (2) the student’s commitment to
the institution. A student’s failing academic performance that corresponds to low test scores,
poor achievement, and low GPAs will either compel a student to leave or coerce dismissal by the
college (Spady, 1970). In addition, Spady (1970) commented that students who do not have
normative congruence with the institution (i.e., having attitudes, interests, and personality
dispositions that are not compatible with the attributes and influences of the college
environment) are more likely to drop out compared to students who have established stronger
social connections with their institutions.
Tinto’s (1975, 1987, 1993) longitudinal model of student departure. Tinto’s (1975,
1987, 1993) model is undoubtedly the most widely used framework for college student
persistence due to its flexibility and applicability to both four- and two-year institutional settings.
Although Spady’s (1970) pioneering work of the dropout process serves as the foundation of
many student persistence theories, Tinto (1975, 1987, 1993) has been most cited in the literature
of student success over the last four decades. As of January 11, 2020, a literature search on
Google Scholar yielded 18,101 citations of Tinto’s Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and
cures of student attrition (1987). According to Braxton (2014), Tinto’s model has contributed
35
the most to the understanding of student persistence and departure.
Vincent Tinto (1975) refined Spady’s (1970) work by adding into account intra-societal
variations (i.e., varying psychological attributes of students) together with levels of educational
and institutional commitments, to explain why students drop out from college (Figure 8). Similar
to Spady’s (1970) model, Tinto (1975, 1987, 1993) described that two distinct systems (i.e.,
academic and social systems) exist within a college environment. First, the academic system
pertains entirely to the institution’s formal education that centers around classrooms,
laboratories, faculty and staff (Tinto 1975). Second, the social system refers to the social
interactions that take place between students, faculty, and staff outside of the formal education
domain (such as in residence halls and cafeterias). The social system centers on the personal
needs and daily lives of the various members of the institution (Tinto, 1975).
Additionally, Tinto (1975, 1987, 1993) posited that two types of commitment act as the
most influential factors in influencing student integration into the academic and social systems:
(1) commitment to the education goal, and (2) commitment to the institution. Tinto wrote, “the
higher the degree of integration of the individual into the college systems, the greater will be his
commitment to the specific institution and to the goal of college completion” (Tinto, 1975, p.
96). Therefore, seclusion from the academic and social systems within the institution will have a
negative effect on student achievement and will ultimately result in student departure (Tinto,
1975, 1987, 1993).
Having its roots in Durkheim’s (1951) suicide theory, Tinto (1975) noted that student
persistence is a longitudinal and interactional process that is directly related to students’ abilities
to integrate into their institution’s societies. The more students assimilate into their institutions’
communities, the more likely are they to persist until degree completion. Their abilities to
36
Figure 8. The model of student departure (Tinto, 1975, 1987, 1993). Adapted from “Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures
of student attrition (2nd ed.),” by V. Tinto, 1970, p. 114. Chicago; London: University of Chicago Press.
37
establish competent memberships into their institutions’ dominant cultures may have varying
effects upon their decisions to depart. Tinto emphasized that “insufficient interactions with
others in the college and insufficient congruency with the prevailing value patterns of the college
collectivity” (Tinto, 1975, p. 92) will result in a student dropping out. Furthermore, Tinto (1975,
1987, 1993) was also influenced by Van Gennep’s (1960) theoretical work on the rites of
passage in tribal societies. Tinto (1993) utilized the three stages of Van Gennep’s (1960) rites of
passage: (1) rites of separation, (2) rites of transition, and (3) rites of incorporation, to further
explain the persistence process of college students. Tinto’s (1975, 1987, 1993) model contended
that in order to persist, students whose backgrounds and experiences are significantly different
from the mainstream culture will have to relinquish their old norms and values, locate a new
community, find membership into the community, and must conform to the culture of that
community. To facilitate successful integration, Tinto (1993) described that college students
must first initiate ‘separation’ from their old communities by disassociating themselves from the
cultures of their old communities. This separation phase will at the same time allow them to
‘transition’ into their new communities in a state of neutrality. Finally, their ‘incorporation’ into
the college system will be completed when they have accepted the norms and behaviors of their
new college communities (Tinto, 1993).
Critique of Tinto’s model. Researchers and practitioners have thoroughly investigated
Tinto’s (1975, 1987, 1993) model. The model has been shown to be applicable for examining the
interactions of factors that affect student persistence and for predicting students who are at risk
of dropping out (Bers & Smith, 1991, Napoli & Wortman, 1998; Pascarella, Smart, & Ethington,
1986; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1979, 1980). Previous studies also substantiated the validity of
38
academic and social integration in predicting the persistence of college students in both four- and
two-year institutions in the United States (Bers & Smith, 1991, Napoli & Wortman, 1998;
Pascarella, Smart, & Ethington, 1986). In addition, the findings of a study conducted on 2,400
undergraduate students at a university in Papua New Guinea supported the applicability of
Tinto’s model in a college setting and environment that was different from those in the United
States (Mannan, 2007).
On the other hand, others have also questioned the theoretical foundations of Tinto’s
model and the lack of representation of minority group students in his research. Godor (2017)
argued that Spady’s (1950) and Tinto’s (1975, 1987, 1993) use of Durkheim’s (1950) theory of
suicide to develop their theories was inappropriate because,
Durkheim’s theory was built upon the central notion that suicide is caused by social
facts/tendencies not found in individuals, but in societies themselves…and this fact
disqualifies egotistical suicide as an analogy for student drop-out if it is solely used to
investigate student-related behaviors and student related characteristics. (Godor, 2017, p.
267)
Other researchers have argued that the social integration aspect of Tinto’s model is inapplicable
to students who come from ethnic minority groups. In a path analysis study that examined the
causal relationships among the variables that affected the retention of 227 Hispanic American
college students, Nora (1985) found that academic and social integration did not have significant
direct effects on the retention of Hispanic American students. Instead, students’ institutional/goal
commitments were found to be of greater significance in determining retention. Rather, Nora
(1985) reported that Hispanic American students with higher levels of institutional/goal
39
commitments are more likely to have higher levels of academic and social integration and,
consequently, are more likely to have levels of retention (Nora, 1985).
Although students’ individual attributes affect how students experience higher education,
previous studies had demonstrated that the campus climates and cultures of colleges and
universities had more significant impacts on the experiences and outcomes of minority students.
Tierney (1992) contended that Tinto’s model has resulted in an integrationist position that is
harmful to individuals who are not from the dominant institutional culture. Hence, Tierney
(1999) argued that it is not necessary for students of minority groups to abandon their ethnic or
cultural ties to be successful in college. Moreover, Museus (2014) asserted that many of the
traditional persistence models do not “include a sufficient consideration of racial and cultural
context in its explanations of student success and therefore, do not sufficiently reflect the racial
and cultural realities faced by students of color in postsecondary education” (p. 200). Other
scholars contended that institutions should also take responsibility in creating positive
environments to enhance student retention. Berger and (1998) reported that institutional
attributes exerted direct effects on students’ social integration which also had significant indirect
effects on first year persistence. According to Godor (2017), early student persistence models
like Tinto’s (1975, 1987, 1993) placed exclusive emphasis on student-related behaviors and
characteristics, disregarding the institution-related behaviors and characteristics that can
influence the quality of students’ experiences in college (Godor, 2017).
Bean’s (1980) model of student attrition. John Bean (1980) developed his causal model
of student attrition as an alternative to Tinto’s (1975) model of student departure to explain the
process of persistence amongst college students. Based on Price’s (1977) work on organizational
turnover, Bean (1980) hypothesized that the factors that cause students to leave their institutions
40
are similar to those that cause employees to leave their organizations (Figure 9). Bean (1980)
criticized the validity of Tinto’s (1975) and Spady’s (1970) models for having variables and
causal linkages that cannot be quantitatively tested using path analysis. For this reason, Bean
(1980) constructed his causal attrition model to contain four categories of variables: (1)
background variables (i.e., performance, socioeconomic status, state resident, distance home, and
hometown size), (2) organizational determinants, (3) intervening variables (i.e., satisfaction and
institutional commitment), and (4) dependent variable (i.e., drop out). Bean’s (1980) model of
student attrition took into account the influence of institutional context on retention and suggests
that college persistence is a result of students’ satisfaction. Different from Tinto’s (1975) model,
Bean (1980) emphasized the significant effects of factors external to the institution in influencing
student’s attitudes and decisions to persist or withdraw (Bean, 1982). A study by Cabrera,
Castañeda, Nora, and Hengstler (1992) that compared Bean’s (1980) and Tinto’s (1975, 1987)
theories corroborated Bean’s (1980) suggestion that factors external to the institution affects
the process of student persistence in more complex and comprehensive extents than the one
described by Tinto (1975, 1987).
In 1977, Bean conducted path analysis and multiple regression to determine the path
coefficients of his model using data he collected from two homogenous samples of 366 male and
541 female students in the United States (Bean, 1980). His sample however, only included white
students who were U.S. citizens and was biased toward higher ability students. Consistent with
Spady (1970) and Tinto (1975), Bean’s (1980) test found that institutional commitment was the
main factor influencing persistence for both male and female students. The main difference was
that male students dropped out even though they were satisfied with the institution. On the other
hand, female students who had high level of satisfaction were more likely to be more committed
41
Figure 9. The causal model of student attrition (Bean, 1980). Adapted from “Dropouts and
turnover: The synthesis and test of a causal model of student attrition,” by J.P. Bean, 1980 p.
158. Research in Higher Education, 12(2).
to the institution and therefore, are less likely to drop out (Bean, 1980).
In addition, Bean (1980) characterized a male student who dropped out as: (1) had low
grade point average, GPA, (2) satisfied with being a student in the institution, (3) had no
42
confidence in the developmental benefits of the program he was attending, (4) found his life as
uninteresting, (5) had poor knowledge of the institution’s social and academic rules, and (6) lived
with his parents. He characterized a female student who dropped out as: (1) not committed to the
institution, (2) performed poorly in high school, (3) was not a member of any campus
organizations, (4) perceived that her program will lead to low employability, (5) not committed
to her educational goal, (6) not satisfied with being a student, (7) had no participation in decision
making, (7) felt that she received preferential treatment, and (8) did not engage with faculty and
staff informally.
Pascarella’s (1980) student-faculty informal contact model. Pascarella (1980)
formulated his student-faculty informal contact model based on Spady’s (1970) and Tinto’s
(1975) theoretical expectations that informal interaction that occur between students and faculty
may have contrasting influences on student persistence (Figure 10). Spady (1970) and Tinto
(1975) presumed that college students will become more socially and academically integrated
when they have more interactions with faculty across different informal, non-classroom settings
which, consequently, will increase their likelihood of persisting. However, except for Rossmann
(1967) and Spady (1971), Pascarella (1980) found that no other research evidence existed to
validate the direct correlation between student-faculty informal contact and students’ persistence.
Hence, together with Tenzerini, Pascarella conducted four extensive research studies on the
persistence of first-year college students to test this assumption (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1977,
1979; Terenzini & Pascarella, 1977, 1978). Their studies presented statistically significant
evidences that:
(1) first-year persistence decisions were significantly related to the total number of
student-faculty informal contacts (Terenzini & Pascarella, 1977, 1978);
43
(2) first-year student withdrawal decisions were significantly related to the number of
interactions students had with faculty to discuss intellectual matters (Pascarella &
Terenzini, 1977, 1979);
(3) the quality and frequency of student-faculty informal interactions were equally
important in influencing student persistence/withdrawal decisions (Pascarella &
Terenzini, 1979); and
(4) the effects of both quality and frequency of student-faculty informal interactions on
persistence/withdrawal decisions varies for different students (Pascarella & Terenzini,
1979).
The student-faculty informal contact model is a longitudinal model that assumes positive
relationships between the amount of student-faculty intimate interactions and student retention,
particularly for students during their first year of college. Pascarella’s (1980) model posited four
factors that influence informal student-faculty contact. First, the extent of student-faculty contact
and various education outcomes are partially explained by initial student characteristics and their
distinctive differences when they enter college. He contended that students who share more
similar personal orientations and pre-enrollment values, interests, and aspirations with faculty
will have more frequent informal interactions with faculty (Pascarella, 1980; Wilson et al., 1974,
1975). Other strong predictors for the degree of informal student-faculty interactions include
initial career dispositions, socioeconomic status, high school achievement, and expectations of
college (Pascarella, 1980; Phelan, 1979; Astin, 1977). Second, Pascarella (1980) proffered that
students’ experiences in college particularly the presence of a high-interacting faculty culture,
the accessibility of faculty to students outside classroom settings, and the classroom behaviors of
faculty tended to significantly increase student’s intellectual interests and openness to ideas.
44
Figure 10. The student-faculty informal contact model (Pascarella, 1980). Adapted from “Student-faculty informal contact and college
outcomes,” by E.T. Pascarella, 1980, p. 569. Review of Educational Research, 50(4).
45
Third, students’ peer-culture experiences tended to have a moderating influence on informal
student-faculty interactions, students’ aspirations, academic performance, personality
development, and persistence in college (Pascarella, 1980). Fourth, according to Pascarella
(1980), organizational and administrative structure also influence student-faculty informal
contact. He hypothesized that the size of the institution and the complexity of its administrative
structure may covary with other factors such as institutional climate and extracurricular structure
in influencing the student-faculty contact beyond the classroom.
Astin’s (1984) theory of student involvement. Alexander Astin (1984) did not produce
any schematic diagrams to illustrate his theory of student involvement and simply proposed that
college students are more likely to persist to graduation if they are more involved in the
academic and social activities of their institutions. Astin (1984) defined student involvement as
“the amount of physical and psychological energy that the students devote to the academic
experience” and that a student that is highly involved “devotes considerable energy to studying,
spends much time on campus, participates actively in student organizations, and interacts
frequently with faculty members and other students” (Astin, 1984, p. 518). Astin’s (1984) theory
suggested that: (1) different students will display different degrees of involvement at different
times, (2) the degree of a student’s involvement can be measured both quantitatively and
qualitatively, (3) the amount of learning and personal development gained is directly
proportional to the quality and quantity of student involvement, and (4) an increase in student
involvement is a direct result of an effective educational policy or practice. The theory
emphasizes that active participation is integral in a student’s learning process and that a student
can achieve a developmental goal by increasing the amount of time and effort he or she spends
participating in college activities (Astin, 1984).
46
Astin (1984) argued that environmental factors had significant roles in affecting students’
involvement on campus. His longitudinal study on college dropouts (Astin, 1975) found that
successful college students were those who: (1) lived on campus residence, (2) were enrolled in
honors programs, (3) were deeply involved academically, (4) had frequent interactions with
faculty, (5) joined social fraternities or sororities, (6) participated in college sports, (7) were
involved in student government, and (8) were employed in on-campus part-time jobs. That being
said, the theory did not place the responsibility solely on students. He suggested that faculty,
administrators, and counselors “assess their own activities in terms of their success in
encouraging students to become more involved in the college experience” (Astin, 1984, p. 529).
Bean and Metzner’s (1985) model of nontraditional student attrition. The use of
Bean and Metzner’s (1985) model (Figure 11) to predict student persistence is commonly
applied by two-year institutions (i.e. community and technical colleges) and online
program/distance learning providers due to their aptness in attracting nontraditional students who
have different needs than those attending four-year universities and colleges. Bean and Metzner
(1985) described nontraditional students as those who are 25 years or older, commute to classes,
and do not enroll as full-time students. Unlike Spady’s (1970), Tinto’s (1975, 1987, 1993), and
Bean’s (1980) explanations of student persistence, Bean and Metzner (1985) argued that the
persistence of nontraditional students is not influenced by their integration and socialization
processes. Bean and Metzner (1985) explained that because nontraditional students do not live
on campus residence, they have less opportunities to interact and socialize with faculty and other
students on campus. As a result, their persistence is less influenced by the institution’s social
environment. Braxton, Hirschy, and McClendon (2004) noted that unlike residential institutions,
the social communities in commuter colleges and universities are not well-defined and less
47
Figure 11. The model of nontraditional student attrition (Bean & Metzner, 1985). Adapted from “A conceptual model of
nontraditional undergraduate student attrition,” by J.P. Bean and B.S. Metzner, 1985, p. 491. Review of Educational Research, 55(4).
48
structured social communities for students to establish membership. Instead, nontraditional
students will be more concerned with the academic and psychological outcomes of attending
college (Bean & Metzner, 1985).
Bean and Metzner (1985) posited that student persistence is a longitudinal process that is
affected by: (1) students’ background variables (i.e., age, hours enrolled, educational goals, high
school performance, ethnicity, gender), (2) academic variables (i.e., study habits, academic
advising, absenteeism, major certainty, availability of courses), (3) environmental variables (i.e.,
finances, employment, hours worked, family responsibilities, encouragement outside the
institution, opportunity to transfer), and (4) psychological variables (i.e., stress, utility,
satisfaction, goal commitment). Students’ decision to drop out is however, preceded by two
major predictors: (1) academic outcome i.e. academic performance based on GPA, and (2) intent
to leave; that is also directly influenced by not only psychological outcomes, but also academic
and environmental variables.
Cabrera, Nora, and Castaneda’s (1993) integrated model of student retention. A
study by Cabrera, Castañeda, Nora, and Hengstler (1992) on the convergent and discriminant
validity of Bean’s (1980) and Tinto’s (1975, 1987) models revealed that several commonalities
exist between the Student Attrition Model (Bean, 1980) and Student Departure Model (Tinto,
1975, 1987). Their findings showed that the two models were “not mutually exclusive; rather,
they were complementary to one another as far as the presumed role of organization and
students’ commitments to the institution was concerned” (Cabrera, Castañeda, Nora, &
Hengstler, 1992, p. 159). More specifically, Cabrera, Castañeda, Nora, and Hengstler’s (1992)
study confirmed a significant overlap between Tinto’s (1975) Institutional Commitment and
Bean’s (1980) Institutional Quality. These findings prompted Cabrera, Castañeda, and
49
Figure 12. The integrated model of student retention (Cabrera, Castañeda, & Nora, 1993. Adapted from “College persistence:
Structural equations modeling test of an integrated model of student retention,” by A.F. Cabrera, A. Nora, and M.B. Castaneda, 1993,
p. 128. The Journal of Higher Education, 64(2).
50
Nora (1993) to merge Tinto’s (1975, 1987) and Bean’s (1980) models and formulate an
integrated model of retention that would provide a more comprehensive understanding of the
persistence process of college students (Figure 12).
The integrated model of student retention (Cabrera, Castañeda, & Nora, 1993) is based on
two sets of variables: (1) environmental variables (i.e., encouragement of friends and family and
finance attitudes) and (2) endogenous variables (i.e., academic integration, GPA, social
integration, institutional commitment, and goal commitment). To validate the theory, Cabrera,
Castañeda, and Nora (1993) conducted a longitudinal research using structural equation
modeling that utilized data collected from 466 first-year students. Results from the study showed
that the integrated model indicated a model fit that was significantly better at explaining the
interplay among individual, institutional, and environmental variables in the persistence process
than either Tinto’s (1975) or Bean’s (1980) models. Intent to persist had the largest total effect
on persistence followed by GPA, Institutional Commitment, Encouragement from friends and
family, Goal commitment, Academic integration, Finance attitudes, and Social integration
(Cabrera, Castañeda, and Nora, 1993). Cabrera, Castañeda, and Nora (1993) argued that a
collaborative effort by the institution that brings together student support services like financial
aid, academic advising, and counseling will play an influential role in increasing students’ intent
to persist and improving overall student retention.
Museus’ (2014) culturally engaging campus environments (CECE) model. Derived
mainly from Tinto’s Model of Student Departure, and by taking into consideration the limitations
of other traditional models of student success, Museus (2014) developed his culturally engaging
campus environments (CECE) model (Figure 13) to better explain the persistence of students
who come from non-dominant cultures. Museus’ (2014) model suggested that “the degree to
51
which culturally engaging campus environments exist at a particular postsecondary institution is
positively associated with more positive individual factors and ultimately greater college student
success” (Museus, 2014, p. 207). While Tinto (1975, 1987, 1993) contended that students who
do not separate themselves from the norms and values of their old communities were more likely
to leave compared to students who conform to the rites of passage, Museus (2014) refuted that
this notion is not pertinent to all students in all settings. In one study involving 34 Southeast
Asian (SEA) American college students that included nine Cambodians, five Hmongs, three
Laotians, 13 Vietnamese, and four multiethnic Southeast Asians (SEAs), Museus, Shiroma, and
Dizon (2016) found that SEA American college students’ success was positively influenced by
the students’ connections to pre-college communities, their connections with campus cultural
agents who resembled their pre-college communities, the presence of diverse staff and faculty on
campus, and individual motivation to succeed.
Museus (2014) formulated his CECE model based on four major critiques that have
emerged from ongoing empirical research on Tinto’s (1975, 1987, 1993) work: (1) the cultural
foundations of Tinto’s model do not account for the experiences of racially and ethnically
diverse student populations, (2) Tinto’ emphasis on students’ self-determination focused mainly
on the individual traits and behaviors of students, without adequately acknowledging the
institution’s role in creating culturally responsive campus climates, (3) there is questionable
evidence that substantiate academic and social integration as factors that predict student success,
and (4) it has been expressed that Tinto’s theory fails to include a psychological dimension i.e.
students’ sense of belonging. Museus (2014) argued that rather than blame students from racially
and ethnically diverse groups for failing to assimilate into their college systems, institutions
should be scrutinized for their ineptitude in responding to the needs of racially and ethnically
52
diverse student populations. He stressed the importance of valuing students’ cultural
backgrounds and emphasized that institutions should have the responsibility to operate in a
multicultural world by incorporating academic and social activities that connect students to their
cultures (Museus, 2014).
Museus’ (2014) CECE model suggested that students at culturally engaging campuses
are “more likely to: (a) exhibit a sense of belonging, more positive academic dispositions, and
higher levels of academic performance, and ultimately, (b) be more likely to persist to
graduation” (p. 210). Similar to all the models of persistence that were derived from Tinto’s
(1975) model of student departure, Museus’ (2014) CECE model stressed the significance of
background factors and prior learning experience. The CECE model posited
A variety of external influences (i.e., finances, employment, family influences) shape
individual influences (i.e., sense of belonging, academic dispositions, and academic
performance) and success among racially diverse college student populations. The model
also suggests that college students enter with precollege inputs (i.e., demographic
characteristics, initial academic dispositions, academic preparation) that influence
individual influences and success. (Museus, 2014, p. 207)
However, the model acknowledged that the experiences of students from difference ethnic and
racial groups may be akin to moving to an entirely different country where norms, attitudes, and
values of the natives are not only quite different but also unknown to the newcomers. Therefore,
the model strongly advocates that institutions move towards transforming dominant mono-racial
culture and values that are prevalent on campus to be more relevant, responsive, and inclusive to
the needs of racially and ethnically diverse student populations.
53
Figure 13. The culturally engaging campus environment (CECE) model of student success (Museus, 2014). Adapted from “The
Culturally Engaging Campus Environments (CECE) Model: A new theory of success among racially diverse college student
populations,” by S.D. Museus, 201, p. 207, in “Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research (Vol. 29),” by M.B. Paulsen,
2014. New York Springer.
Culturally Engaging Campus Environments (Cultural Familiarity, Culturally Relevant Knowledge, Cultural
Community Service, Opportunities for Meaningful Cross-Cultural
Engagement, Collectivist Cultural Orientations, Culturally Validating
Environments, Humanized Educational Environments, Proactive
Philosophies, Availability of Holistic Support)
External
Influences (Financial Influences,
Employment Influences,
Family Influences)
Pre-College
Inputs (Demographics, Initial
Academic Dispositions,
Academic Preparation)
Individual Influences
College Success
Outcomes (e.g. Persistence and
Degree Completion)
Sense of
Belonging
Academic
Dispositions (Academic Self-
Efficacy, Academic
Motivation, Intent
to Persist)
Academic
Performance
54
The CECE model identified nine specific indicators of campus environments that can
foster success amongst racially and ethnically diverse students. These indicators are:
(1) Cultural familiarity – opportunities for students to connect with faculty, staff, and
peers who share a similar background to their own;
(2) Culturally relevant knowledge –opportunities for students to cultivate, sustain, and
increase knowledge of their cultures and communities;
(3) Cultural community service – focusing community service to engage the student’s
culture;
(4) Opportunities for meaningful cross-cultural engagement – providing the means for
students to have positive and intentional interactions with students from different
cultures;
(5) Collectivist cultural orientations – engaging students with a more collectivist (rather
than individualistic) orientation experience;
(6) Culturally validating environments – surrounding students with campus educators that
create positive experiences by validating students’ cultural backgrounds and identities;
(7) Humanized educational environments – the presence of campus agents who are
committed to developing meaningful relationships with students;
(8) Proactive philosophies – proactive faculty and staff that provide resources and
information to students from diverse racial and ethnic groups; and
(9) Availability of support – the accessibility of holistic support for students (Museus,
2014).
Campus climate and campus culture within higher education institutions have received
considerable attention in higher education literature recently. Campus racial climate research has
55
consistently found that minority group students are dissatisfied with the campus climate at their
schools, which could affect their retention (Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Rankin & Reason, 2005).
Cultural validation involving affirming, valuing, and engaging students’ cultural identities,
experiences, and values has also been shown to positively linked to students’ success (Hurtado &
Carter, 1997; Museus, 2014; Museus & Maramba, 2011; Rendón, 1994; Rendón & Munoz,
2011). According to Rendón (1994), validation or the intentional, proactive affirmation of
students by in- and out-of-class campus agents can foster positive learning experiences and
promotes success. How colleges and universities create their campus environments and
educators’ actions, influence the success of their students (Jayakumar & Museus, 2012).
A Synthesis of the Conceptual Models
The last five decades saw the development of various models of student persistence that
were based on sociological (Pascarella, 1980, Spady, 1970; Tinto, 1975, 1987, 1993),
psychological (Astin, 1984), organizational (Bean, 1980), integrated (Bean & Metzner, 1985;
Cabrera, Nora, & Castaneda, 1993), and cultural (Museus, 2014) perspectives. All models
described student persistence as a longitudinal process that is affected by diverse range of
individual, environmental, and institutional factors. Earlier work on student persistence were
predominantly influenced by three major theories: (1) Durkheim’s (1951) suicide theory, (2) Van
Gennep’s (1960) rites of passage, and (3) Price’s (1977) organizational turnover. The historical
review of the models however, indicated the shift in focus from attributing attrition to student’s
dispositions, interests, attitudes, and skills to current discussions on what universities can do to
improve student persistence that is inclusive of minority and historically underserved student
populations.
56
Early psychological theories such as Astin’s (1984), attributed students’ withdrawal to
the psychological weaknesses of individual students. While Spady (1970) and Tinto (1975, 1987,
1993) both acknowledged the role students’ psychological characteristics play in predicting
student departure, their sociological perspectives went beyond psychological theories by
emphasizing the social behaviors of college students and their abilities to integrate as members
of their institutions’ academic and social systems. Pascarella (1980) advanced Spady’s (1970)
and Tinto’s (1975) work and explained how social interactions between students and faculty
impacted their college experiences, educational outcomes, and their decisions to persist. In
contrast, Bean (1980) criticized the sociological views of Spady (1970) and Tinto (1975, 1987,
1993) and their theoretical links to Durkheim’s (1951) suicide model. Instead, Bean (1980) took
on the organizational perspective in his attempt to explain the student persistence phenomenon.
He posited that student dropout is significantly affected by students’ satisfaction with various
institutional/organizational features such as the administrative system, faculty and staff,
facilities, campus jobs, and opportunities for transfers (Bean, 1980).
Although the validity of psychological, sociological, and organizational models had been
substantiated by numerous studies, Cabrera, Nora, and Castaneda (1993) later claimed that an
integrated model which blended Bean’s (1980) and Tinto’s (1975, 1987) models together,
provided an even better fit for explaining the student persistence phenomenon. Bean and Metzner
(1985) also attempted to integrate psychological, sociological, economic, and environmental
perspectives into their model because they believed that all four different perspectives
contributed considerable insights into the persistence behaviors of non-traditional students. For
example, since most non-traditional students over 25 years old live off-campus, enroll as part-
time students, and work full-time, the economic perspective may play a more significant
57
influence on persistence than social interaction or integration. Finally, Museus (2014)
emphasized the relationship between institutional cultural factors and student persistence.
According to Habley, Bloom, Robbins, and Gore (2012), persistence studies that are based on the
cultural perspective focuses on not only minority students but also on international students.
It is important to note that these models were not developed to present the exact causes of
student attrition, but rather to present the complex interplay that exist between different internal
and external factors that contribute to the persistence process. For example, when both academic
and environmental variables are poor, students are expected to drop put. However, a student
might decide to stay and persist when environmental variables (such as family support and
financial aid) are good even though he or she is struggling with low grades on the academic
variables (Bean & Metzner, 1985). For this reason, I do not think it is helpful for me to provide a
compilation of a priori themes or specific factors that cause students to drop out of their
programs. Like many studies around student persistence, retention, and attrition, these models
are limited by their generalizability. Many of the models of student persistence were developed
based on the multitude the multitude of empirical studies conducted in particular institutions and
specific populations.
Malay Students
Malays are one of the indigenous groups of people in the Malay Archipelago who live in
Brunei, Malaysia, Singapore, parts of Indonesian Sumatera and Kalimantan, Isthmian Thailand,
and Cambodia. They are distinguished from other indigenous peoples of SEA by being closely
associated with the Malay language, Malay culture and the religion of Islam. For this study,
Malay students will be specifically used to refer to the Malay students from Brunei. The local
population of Brunei comprises the Malay ethnic group which account for about 66% of the
58
population, followed by the Chinese (10%), Borneo indigenous groups (3%), and other minority
racial groups (20%) (DEPD, 2017). Brunei’s National Vision 2035 aspires for citizens to be well
education, highly skilled, and highly accomplished with a quality life that is at least on par with
other developed nations of the world (Ministry of Education, 2012). To realize this vision, the
government has invested heavily in developing its higher education teaching capabilities and
research impact. Brunei’s higher education is currently made up of four four-year public
universities, one two-year polytechnic, one postsecondary institute for technical education, and
six private colleges of higher education.
The structure of the Brunei education system is quite similar to that of the British
education system. It upholds the policy of providing a minimum of twelve years compulsory
education after which, students are provided the option of progressing to two-year postsecondary
education at either pre-university college or a technical education institution. Students who have
done well can then enroll into a local or foreign university. Brunei maintains a unitary system of
education, which is closely monitored and regulated by the Ministry of Education. It is one of the
few countries that still provide free education up to the graduate level to its citizens and
permanent residents, although competition for places has become extremely fierce in recent
years. Poole (2006) stated that “Although Brunei clearly lacks the political freedom that exists in
Indonesia and Malaysia, it is well ahead of many Middle Eastern countries in term of religious
freedom and gender equality” (p. 150). Higher education in Brunei is female dominated with the
ratio at 67 males to 100 females (Brunei Department of Statistics, 2016). According to a recent
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation report (APEC Policy Support Unit, 2017), Brunei currently
has the highest share of women graduates in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM)
59
in the Asia-Pacific region. 49.5 percent of STEM graduates in Brunei are female compared with
45.4% in Singapore, 32% in the United States, and 27.9% in South Korea (APEC, 2017).
Ethnoreligious identity. Malays constitute one of the largest ethnoreligious groups in the
world. According to Kumagai (1995), the concept of the Malay culture and its ideology is
closely intertwined with that of: (1) Malay language and customs, (2) the integration of Islamic
principles, and (3) the influence of British colonial legislative laws. Brunei is known for having a
distinctive culture that is strongly influenced by the country’s Malay Islamic Monarchy
philosophy which embodies the people’s profound attachment to Brunei Malay culture, Islamic
principles, and loyalty to the monarchy (Braighlinn, 1992). Although Brunei has been
independent for 34 years, British cultural traces still impinge on many systems of the country
including education. Malay is the national language of Brunei, but the English language is
widely used in higher education institutions at both undergraduate and graduate levels. The
Malay language affords the people of Brunei, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Singapore a binding
linguistic and cultural bond (Lowenberg, 1985). The Constitutions of Malaysia and Singapore
also states Malay as their national languages while Indonesia adopted Bahasa Indonesia, a
reformed version of Malay, as its national language.
Unlike individualistic Western cultures, the Bruneian Malays are characterized by its
extended family culture and is considered to be based on collectivism where social norms,
obligations, and duties to one’s society is emphasized (Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010).
For example, Bruneian students who study abroad are expected to return home immediately after
graduating from their study programs, realign themselves with society, and contribute to the
development of society and country. Traditional Malays place great emphasis on manners and
are characterized as polite, courteous, considerate, self-effacing, helpful, and possessing a strong
60
sense of familial and community spirit (Mastor, Jin, & Cooper, 2000; Crouch, 1996). In his
research on the cultural values of Malays, Goddard (1997) stated that Malay speakers tend to be
very careful about commenting or opposing others’ views. Malays who speak loudly are
considered impolite, and such behavior is considered a sign of negative emotion (Goddard,
1997).
Data analysis of the World Values Survey (Inglehart & Welzel, 2015) indicated that
societies in English-speaking countries i.e., the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia
and societies in SEA countries such as Malaysia, Thailand, and Indonesia are located on the
opposites of two major dimensions of cross-cultural variation in the world. This suggests that
SEA Malay students would find strong adjustment challenges in the United States, the United
Kingdom, and Australia. SEA countries ranked as having high traditional and moderate survival
values where the importance of religion, parent-child ties, respect for authority, and traditional
family values are emphasized. SEA societies also prioritize economic and physical security over
liberty. In contrast, societies in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia are ranked
as having high self-expression and moderate traditional values characterized by high levels of
political engagement, environment protection, and growing tolerance to diversity (Inglehart &
Welzel, 2015).
Limited research has been carried out on the Bruneian Malay identity, but in one survey
involving Malaysian Malays in 2005, Martinez (2006) found that the majority of Malaysian
Malays identified themselves as Muslim (72.2 percent) rather than Malay (12.5 percent) or
Malaysian (14.4 percent). Hence, Islamic values and beliefs play a primary role in Malay culture
that pervade every aspect of life of the Malays (Mastor, Jin, & Cooper, 2000; Derichs, 1999).
61
Mastor, Jin, and Cooper (2000) explained,
The Malays look on values as being inseparable from religious teachings. In the Malay
culture, one who refers his or her judgement to religious teachings is considered to be an
open person. On the other hand, those who negate religious opinion are regarded as
closed persons. (p. 109)
Bruneian Malays students who pursue higher education abroad are an interesting group; the ways
they adjust or maintain their ethnic identity abroad can be more flexible and situational.
However, most of them would not disregard their Islamic beliefs, values, and practices. This can
lead to the potential problem of possibly facing discriminatory remarks or negative perceptions
of their Muslim identity.
International students of color experience more difficulties with adjustment and identify
more experiences with discrimination than White international students (Fritz et al., 2008;
Hanassab, 2006; Lee & Rice, 2007; Poyrazli & Grahame, 2007; Spencer-Rodgers, 2001).
Poyrazli and Lopez (2007) reported that almost half of the whole international student population
in their study stated they had experienced discrimination in some form, and it seemed this
situation was not getting any better. A survey conducted following the September 11 attacks
revealed that Australians’ knowledge of Islam is based on stereotypes that associate Muslims
with intolerance of other religion, fanaticism, fundamentalism, militancy, and misogyny (Dunn,
Klocker, & Salabay, 2007). The situation is not much better in the United States where the
likelihood of Muslims experiencing prejudice and discrimination is even higher than in Australia
(Barkdull et al., 2011). Lee (2006) provided a broad range of negative responses of what it
means to be an international student from Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East. She
argued that the consequences of neo-racism experienced by international students ranged from
62
feelings of discomfort to verbal insults and direct confrontation and this is likely to affect their
college persistence.
One major cultural challenge for international students is adjusting their dietary
preferences and eating habits. In his study that involved students from China, Sweden, and the
Republic of Cote d’Ivoire, Leong (2015) found that some of the international students were
struggling with the U.S. food culture. Additionally, Fischer (2005) explained that concern over
foods being halal is more pronounced in SEA countries like Brunei, Malaysia, Indonesian, and
Singapore, compared to much of the Middle East and South Asia. Muslims are expressly
forbidden from consuming non-halal food. For Malays, halal food also means food that had not
been in contact with another non-halal food. Malay students would take some time to adjust their
strict food habits as they try to fit in the new culture.
English language competency. English proficiency has been identified as a significant
predictor of both psychological and sociocultural adjustment (Zhang & Goodson, 2011). A large
amount of research on international student issues has focused language difficulties (Andrade,
2006a). The language barrier can cause international students to experience intense anxiety when
asked to present in class or express themselves in formal conversations (DuBose, 017). Bruneian
Malay students demonstrate a spectrum of English language competency. Those from upper-
middle class backgrounds are likely to have experienced all their education through the medium
of English and are likely to have had open access to a wide range of English language media. At
the opposite end of the scale, students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds may have
experienced limited formal English language teaching during their compulsory education and
fewer opportunities to practice verbal English.
63
Except for SEA Malays from Singapore where English is the country’s official language,
Malay students from Brunei, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, and Cambodia very rarely use
English outside of class for social interactions. For this reason, SEA Malay students may still
need additional help even after having completed their English Language courses in high school.
They may face difficulties concerning the uses of the English language particularly in listening
comprehension and oral expressions that are important for classroom interactions abroad. Also,
the variation in English accents across the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia can
also complicate comprehension for the Malay international student. Difficulties related to
language competence lead not only to difficulties in academic performance, but also issues with
self-efficacy and low-self-confidence, inhibiting international students’ abilities to form social
networks (Cheng & Fox, 2008; Grey, 2002; Hechanova-Alampay et al., 2002; Olivas & Li,
2006; Poyrazli & Grahame, 2007).
Learning patterns. Many international students face dilemmas over how they are
expected to learn in a western learning environment (Ward, 2001). An international student’s
original values and culture often affect the attitude and academic decisions made by the student.
Students in collectivist cultures are expected to be quiet and deferential in class (Rosenberg,
Wrestling, & McLeskey, 2008). Due to the effects of prior learning experience, international
students are known to play a passive role in class are not prepared to adopt an active classroom
culture (Sawir et al., 2008). Goldschmidt and Ousey (2006) found that different learning and
teaching styles can sometimes cause learning failure in the new environment and affect the
attitude of international students. In Brunei, extensive efforts are being made to adopt
independent learning styles, but in general the educational culture can still be described as more
structured, and hierarchical than the more individualistic western academic system.
64
Lin and Scherz (2014) reported that one of their participants had a difficult time in
forming relationships with her instructors. In her home country, the participant noted that the
relationship between student and instructor was always formal and serious and she was surprised
when she found that the instructors in the United States were more approachable. In many SEA
cultures, academic staff is still regarded as the primary authority who holds knowledge, power,
and control and whose responsibility is to provide comprehensive instruction and guidance. This
means that Bruneian Malay students will be less likely to raise questions and more likely to face
challenges in comprehending the concept of freedom of thought, as such behaviors may be
perceived as not showing respect to their instructors. In contrast to students in western cultures,
the quiet and diligent student in SEA cultures is often considered as interested and engaged. In
countries like Brunei, Singapore, and Malaysia, the education system is also heavily dependent
on examinations where extreme diligence and hard work are key characteristics for success.
Conclusion
This chapter provided a literature review of the research studies that inform this study.
There is extensive research that investigated issues concerning student persistence in higher
education. In their efforts to address retention and attrition problems, universities and colleges
have become more attentive to the voices of their students to better discern how institutional
climates, cultures, and policies impact students’ interactions and experiences on campus. While
little is still known about why and how international students persist, research on the persistence
of minority students continue to grow as universities and colleges attempt to reduce the gaps in
degree attainments amongst racial and ethnic minority groups. This is reflected in the
advancement of student persistence models; from traditional models that were developed based
on psychological and sociological perspectives to contemporary models that incorporated all
65
other different perspectives i.e., psychological, sociological, organizational, interactional,
environmental, economic, and cultural. Although the eight different models of student
persistence reviewed in this literature review are limited by their generalizability, they help
faculty, student affairs professionals, and policy makers identify common risk factors that early
on so that they can develop effective strategies to retain and graduate more students from their
campuses. Finally, this literature review examined the characteristics of the population of
interest, Malay students from Southeast Asia, in relation to their ethnoreligious identity, cultural
variations, learning patterns, and English language competency.
66
Chapter 3. METHODOLOGY
The overarching objective of my study was to develop a substantive grounded theory or
framework for understanding the process of student persistence from the viewpoint of
international students, particularly those from the Malay ethnic group from Southeast Asia
(SEA). A substantive grounded theory is an inductively developed theory that is related to the
analysis of a substantive area of inquiry such as student persistence, student retention, or race
relations (Mills & Birks, 2014). The study posed the research question: How do Malay students
from Southeast Asia persist to degree completion when enrolling in higher education programs
in the United Kingdom, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand? This research question
was best addressed using a qualitative research approach (Charmaz, 2006; Creswell, 2013;
Corbin & Strauss, 2015) that provided me with rich contextual information needed to describe
and understand what influences persistence for SEA Malay students, and why they were able to
persist when enrolled in colleges and universities outside of the Malay Archipelago.
Qualitative Approach to Inquiry
Corbin and Strauss (2015) defined qualitative research as, “a form of research in which a
researcher or designated coresearcher collects and interprets data, making the researcher as much
a part of the research process as participants and the data they provide” (p. 4). There were several
reasons why I decided to use a qualitative approach to answer the research question for this
study. Understanding the persistence behaviors of SEA Malay students were best accomplished
using qualitative rather than quantitative methods because it is an area that is not yet extensively
researched. Quantitative methods would be most applicable to further test the variables or
elements of a theoretical model that have been determined and developed by a qualitative study.
Rendón et al. (2000) advocated for the use of qualitative methods, which would allow students to
67
define and elaborate on who or what was affecting their educational experiences that could then
be tested using quantitative methods. Since little research has been conducted to show the
persistence of SEA Malays students studying abroad and no framework or model currently exists
to explain their success, a qualitative interpretive approach was more appropriate as a method of
building contextual knowledge and substantive theory.
Qualitative research is descriptive, communicative, and aimed towards exploring the
inner experiences of participants (Corbin & Strauss, 2015). This approach helped me uncover a
deeper understanding about my participants’ behaviors and the principles that ruled and guided
their behaviors (Granegeim & Lundman, 2004). The interpretive, emergent, dynamic, and free-
flowing characteristics of qualitative research relies on the researcher’s abilities in collecting and
analyzing data (Creswell, 2013; Corbin & Strauss, 2015). According to Bogdan and Biklen
(2007), qualitative study is: (1) context-sensitive and carried out in real-world situations; (2)
open-ended and explanatory, using participants’ own words and viewpoint regarding perceptions
and experiences; (3) characterized by the attention to process, rather than outcomes; (4)
distinguished by an inductive reasoning approach of data analysis; and (5) purposeful, seeking an
in-depth understanding of a phenomenon i.e., what participants think and perceive. Creswell
(2013) identified five different approaches that comprise qualitative research dimensions: (1)
Case Study, (2) Ethnography, (3) Grounded Theory, (4) Narrative, and (5) Phenomenology. My
study was an exploratory study that used the basic principles of an evolved grounded theory
analysis (Corbin & Strauss, 2015).
Grounded Theory
The grounded theory approach was used as it is an appropriate fit for exploring
underdeveloped areas in research. In contrast to other qualitative approaches to inquiry,
68
grounded theory does not hinge on prevailing theoretical frameworks. Glaser (1998) clearly
articulated that grounded theory was developed not to test or replicate theory, but to discover
concepts and generate theory. According to Fassinger (2005), the ensuing aim of a grounded
theory study is to develop a theory that is: (1) grounded in the discovery of emerging patterns in
data, and (2) directly derived from data that is collected from participants’ individual
interpretations of an experience. Creswell (2013) emphasized that grounded theory is a fitting
choice to employ when there is no other theory available that can explain a process of the
population of interest. While there are numerous studies that reported persistence challenges
amongst international student (Poyrazli & Grahame, 2007), no study has reported the persistence
of SEA Malay international students as a subgroup, and only a small amount of literature is
available on Malay students research. The grounded approach allowed me to immerse myself in
the data through interactions with participants without preconceived notions. As stated by Glaser
(1998), the aim of grounded theory is to promote the freedom of discovery by which the
researcher needs to “suspend what he or she knows, keep studying the data, conceptualize, and
constantly compare” (p. 81). A robust theory offers explanations about why events happen and
describes causal relationships as well as timing of the events that occur.
Developed in 1967 by sociologists, Barney Glaser and Anselm Strauss, grounded theory
was originally conceived as a new method of systematically collecting and inductively coding
qualitative data to derive a theory that is “understandable to sociologists and layman, providing
relevant predictions, explanations, interpretations, and applications” (Glaser & Strauss, 1967, pp.
1-3). However, Glaser and Strauss’ (1967) postpositivist approach to grounded theory places
absolute focus on the emergence of theory from data collected without accounting for any
connections the data have to the research site, culture, society, or paradigm (Mills & Birks,
69
2014). For this reason, traditional grounded theorists would position themselves as separate from
the participants in the generation of data. This lack of attention to context was addressed by
Corbin and Strauss when they developed the “evolved grounded theory” in 1990. Unlike Glaser
and Strauss’ (1967) traditional grounded theory, Corbin and Strauss’ (1990) evolved grounded
theory requires the researcher to assume a relativist position where context-specific data is
collected and analyzed. Corbin and Strauss (1990) also acknowledged that a researcher’s
previous experiences and histories will affect how he or she uses the grounded theory methods.
They added that the researcher’s symbiotic interactions with study participants will exert
influence on the generation of data from unstructured interviews (Mills & Bricks, 2014).
My study followed the guidelines of Corbin and Strauss (2015) and Creswell (2013). I
gathered my own data using my own instruments, collected interview data, used inductive and
deductive reasoning when analyzing data, analyzed interactions with participants, reported
participant perspectives, and allowed the design of the study to emerge during the process.
Although each perspective was different, my participants were allowed to share valuable real-life
experiences, and their actual words provided the foundations that generated a theory related to
the phenomenon that I was interested in exploring. Corbin and Strauss (2015) asserted that the
systematic procedures of a grounded theory study “have been proven to be culturally sensitive
and applicable to individuals as well as to larger organizations and societies” (p.11). Data was
utilized to ground the study and focused on asking questions that explained why and how SEA
Malay students experienced persistence in college. Accordingly, the grounded theory
methodology enabled me to explore the most prevalent implicit factors (problems, challenges,
obstacles, goals, strategies, etc.) and the meanings that participants attributed to these factors
70
while constructing the theory (Charmaz, 2006). A particular strength of grounded theory is that it
can be “revised and updated as new knowledge is acquired” (Corbin & Strauss, 2015, p. 11).
The broad research question of this study allowed the participants’ experiences to
emerge. This grounded study proffered an explanation of this unique phenomenon by constantly
comparing the concepts derived from the data of SEA Malay students with the eight major
models of student persistence: (1) Spady’s (1970) sociological model of the dropout process, (2)
Tinto’s (1975, 1987, 1993) longitudinal model of student departure, (3) Bean’s (1980) model of
student attrition, (4) Pascarella’s (1980) student-faculty informal contact model, (5) Astin’s
(1984) theory of student involvement, (6) Bean and Metzner’s (1985) model of nontraditional
student attrition, (7) Cabrera, Nora, and Castaneda’s (1993) model, and (8) Museus’ (2014)
model of culturally engaging campus environments. Theoretical explorations portrayed and
explained the college persistence behaviors, attitudes, and decisions of SEA Malay student in
colleges and universities that were significantly different from where they come from. The new
theory, grounded in both the data and existing theory on student success would potentially
provide educators and administrators with a different perspective on how to address the
persistence of students from diverse racial, ethnic backgrounds and nationalities.
Setting and Context
Theoretical sampling is a unique feature of grounded study. According to Brekenridge
and Jones (2009), “Theoretical sampling is a central tenet of classic grounded theory and is
essential to the development and refinement of a theory that is ‘grounded’ in data” (p. 113).
Theoretical sampling (Figure 15) is essentially the collection of data that is based on the analysis
of previous data to provide the researcher “with a sense of direction of where to go and what to
do next” (Corbin and Strauss, 2015, p. 69). Corbin and Strauss (2015) recommended theoretical
71
sampling that is concept driven, open, and flexible be used for the first interviews. Hence, I
initially used open sampling for the first two or three interviews, and as concepts were derived
from the analysis of the data collected, I then used theoretical sampling for subsequent data
collection. Theoretical sampling allowed me to sample concepts that I sought to understand and
develop into important categories. A more pragmatic purposeful sampling was used to identify
the sites, participants, and situations for the study. In qualitative research, the richness of
information, appropriateness, and adequacy of the sample is the one that answers the research
question (O’Reilly & Parker, 2013). According to Creswell (2013), effort should be made to
immerse the researcher in the context of the institutional setting for an extended period to allow
for prolonged exposure to the phenomenon as well as rich detail in the recorded observations and
reflections.
Figure 14. The processes of theoretical sampling (Corbin and Strauss, 2015). Adapted from
“Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory,”
by J. Corbin and A. Strauss, 2015, p. 135. SAGE Publications.
Data Collection
Analysis Questions
Data Collection
Analysis Questions
Data Collection
Analysis Questions
72
The participants. The participants were recruited based on their ability to purposefully
inform the central phenomenon in the study and those who can contribute to the development of
the theory (Creswell, 2013). The Malay population is distributed throughout the Malay
Archipelago in Southeast Asia that crosses numerous state borders encompassing Brunei,
Malaysia, Singapore, parts of Indonesian Sumatera and Kalimantan, and Isthmian Thailand. Due
to limited time at task and access, my sampling population consisted of only Malay students
from Brunei. My study depended on having access to Bruneian Malay students who had recently
graduated from colleges and universities in the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, and
New Zealand. Draucker, Martsolf, Ross, and Rusk (2007) noted that “the overall process of data
collection remains uncertain because of saturation” (p. 6). According to Creswell (2013), the
actual number of study participants would depend on when data saturation is attained, but he
recommended a guideline of twenty to thirty interviews be conducted to completely saturate a
theory. For this research, I collected sufficient data from 28 participants to develop a theory that
is dense, logical, and has no apparent gaps in the explanations.
Each participant had to meet specific eligibility criteria to participate in the study.
Participants consisted of Malay students from Brunei who had graduated from their
undergraduate programs in the last three years from colleges and universities at the four study
abroad sites. The participants demonstrated persistence and continued their academic enrollment
from semester-to-semester throughout their undergraduate programs. I obtained permission from
the Ministry of Education in Brunei to access Bruneian Malay graduates who studied abroad.
Participants were recruited through data provided from the Ministry of Education Scholarship
Section who were responsible for monitoring all Bruneian undergraduate students studying in
higher education institutions overseas. Each participant who participated was asked to sign a
73
consent form and was informed that they had the right to withdraw from the study at any time.
Pseudonyms were assigned to the participants to protect their anonymity and confidentiality. A
chart was be presented to describe in more detail the characteristics of the sample population.
The study sites. I selected four study sites i.e., the United States, the United Kingdom,
Australia, and New Zealand due to significant dissimilarities in cultural, environmental and
campus climates they have with other higher education settings in SEA. These sites are also the
four main destinations of higher education for Malay students coming from the two Malay-
majority countries in SEA i.e., Brunei and Malaysia. By targeting these four sites I believed that
I would be able to gather diverse perspectives that would enhance the theory’s ability to explain
the persistence of SEA Malay students studying abroad. As the main source for data, the
interviews allowed me to capture the type of information that I required. To address logistical
and financial restrictions, face-to-face semi-structured interviews was conducted mostly in
Brunei. Repeated contact with participants were necessary during the latter part of the study for
purposes of obtaining additional or overlooked information as well as clarification of data
collected.
Data Collection
Grounded theory is characterized by the precise steps the researcher needs to follow to
ensure the quality and rigor of the theory: (1) Initial review of literature; (2) Open coding; (3)
Axial coding; (4) Selective coding; (5) Initial draft of theory; (6) Integration of literature into the
theory; and (7) Generation of substantive theory (Strauss & Corbin, 2015; see Figure 15). The
primary method of data collection was one-on-one semi-structured interviews utilizing the
authentic voices of SEA Malay students. Data collection was carried out with a goal of
74
identifying theoretical concepts and linkages that can answer the research question. Creswell
(2013) commented that semi-structured interviews are highly productive in qualitative research.
I chose to conduct semi-structured interviews over other types of interviews (i.e.,
unstructured interviews and structured interviews), as they allowed me to maintain some
consistency for easier comparison by covering the same topics or asking the same questions in
each interview. I developed a semi-structured interview protocol for participants that allowed me
to ask a set of pre-determined open-ended questions to encourage new ideas and themes.
Participants, however, guided the course of the interview and was encouraged to add any other
information they felt relevant to include in the interview discussions at their own pace. Relevant
additional or emerging questions about the study were also asked.
Charmaz (2014) wrote that interviews “typically means a gently-guided, one-sided
conversation that explores research participants’ perspective on their personal experience with
the research topic” (p. 56). The process of data collection consisted of semi-structured interviews
in conjunction with the review and comparison of data collected from previous interviews
extracting themes or categories, for constant comparison (Corbin & Strauss, 2015). One-on-one
interviews with participants examined individual- and culturally related factors that were
influential in enhancing or hindering their persistence. Each interview was recorded digitally and
transcribed verbatim. Most importantly, in grounded theory each interview session was followed
whenever possible by data analysis. Other sources of data included memos, diagrams,
documents, and literature. Writing memos (i.e., ideas and theoretical notes about the data),
diagrams, and reviewing documents and literature during the data collection process, provided
perspective and clarity to the movement of the process under study (Creswell, 2013).
75
Figure 15. Schematic representation of the Grounded theory procedures (Corbin & Strauss,
2015). Adapted from “Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing
grounded theory,” by J. Corbin and A. Strauss, 2015, p. 343. SAGE Publications.
Initial review of the
literature
Open coding
Assigning
code labels
to identify
categories
Open coding
Axial coding
Exploring
relationship
between
categories to
explain what
is going on
Selective
coding
Integrating and
refining the
emerging theory
First draft of
theory
Integration of relevant
literature into the theory
Substantive theory
Microanalysis
of data
Constant
comparative
analysis
Data
collection
informed by
theoretical
sampling
76
Data collection commenced in January 2019 after the approval of the research protocol
was granted by the University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa institutional review board (IRB). During the
data collection process, I employed a social constructivism approach accepting that multiple
realities existed, which can only be understood in the interactions between the researcher and the
participants (Creswell, 2013). I also thought about how my personal experiences affected data
interpretations and findings. Creswell (2013) described social constructivism as one of the main
paradigms that researchers employ in their studies whereby researchers seek to understand how
the world works. Social constructivism is an inductive process and the social constructivist
perspective acknowledges that participants are engaged in meaning-making by constructing the
individual interpretations of their interactions with culture and society. Every interview
discussion between the participants and I presented an opportunity for me to obtain new
knowledge and expand existing information I had on Malay students.
Data analysis
Initial coding: Open. In evolved grounded theory, data collection and data analysis are
interrelated processes. A cyclic exploratory process that included coding, memoing,
diagramming and constant comparison took place concurrently (Figure 16). In the early stages,
data analysis began with open coding which included the processes of: (1) the interpretation of
the first pieces of raw data i.e., interpreting the meaning of the data by identifying initial
concepts, and (2) the conceptual ordering of data i.e., organizing data into discrete categories,
properties, and dimensions (Corbin & Strauss, 2015). As suggested by Corbin and Strauss
(2015), initial and lower level concepts were derived from data collected during the research
process, not before research was conducted. Using the constant comparisons method of data
analysis, all information in the data was first open-coded inductively into as many categories as
77
possible until a central phenomenon or concept began to emerge. Each category and concept
derived from the data were compared against each other for similarities and differences. In vivo
codes i.e., the actual words of the participants, was used to code the concepts that emerged from
the data. I used the computer program, NVivo, to assist coding and to store, retrieve, and
reorganize ideas about the data.
Figure 16. Interrelated processes of data collection and data analysis in grounded theory. (Corbin
& Strauss, 2015). Adapted from “Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory,” by J. Corbin and A. Strauss, 2015, p. 7. SAGE Publications.
Once concepts were derived from the existing data, themes were then identified, which
were further unpacked into categories to examine properties and dimensions. Properties are the
characteristics that explain and describe concepts, whereas dimensions give specificity and range
to concepts (Corbin & Strauss, 2015). As more data were collected, new properties and
dimensions were added to develop and validate a concept. A particular strength of grounded
theory is that the researcher will constantly evaluate the interpretations of the data throughout the
Analyze data
Continued collection and
analysis of data based on concepts derived during the research process
Collect data
78
study. Unlike quantitative methods, where the concept or variable names are always fixed, the
concepts identified during a qualitative analysis are tentative and can be renamed whenever the
researcher arrives at new meanings and interpretations of the data (Corbin & Strauss, 2015).
The ability of the grounded theory researcher to make new meaning and interpretations
will depend on his or her adeptness in dissociating himself or herself from existing literature,
theory, and personal experience. After concepts were assigned, the evolved grounded theory
analysis then proceeded with axial coding around the initial concepts.
Intermediate coding: Axial. At the point of conceptual saturation, axial coding
commenced with the aim of exploring the possible relationships between concepts which include
causal conditions, specific strategies, context, intervening conditions, and consequences. As
more interviews were conducted and additional data gathered, a concept could be further
explored and developed to derive new concepts. The different concepts could then be linked
together to explain what was actually occurring. Other sources of data such as memos, diagrams,
and documents were analyzed to validate the interviews.
At this point, the initial analysis of the data for context was essential for theory
construction (Corbin & Strauss, 2015). This involved: (1) coding concepts that denoted action-
interaction; (2) linking action-interaction to the conditions (i.e., events or happenings) in which it
occurred; and (3) linking action-interaction to the consequences or outcomes that resulted when
certain actions and interactions were taken. Analyzing the data for context was aided by writing
memos and doing diagrams (the processes of memoing and diagramming will be described
further on page 80). Axial coding reached its theoretical saturation when additional coding no
longer modified the core category i.e., when further theoretical sampling did not contribute to the
further development of categories. In grounded theory, a core category is defined as “a concept
79
that is sufficiently broad and abstract that summarizes in a few words the main ideas expressed in
the study” (Corbin & Strauss, 2015, p. 187). The saturation of categories involved the processes
of interviewing, re-interviewing, and looking at the category until no new information was
obtained or provided any further insight into the category (Creswell, 2013).
Advance coding: Selective. Following axial coding, data collection continued, but coded
selectively to explain the emergent relationships between the categories and their theoretical
relevance. This process of theoretical integration was the final step of data analysis where
categories were linked around a central or core category to form theory (Corbin & Strauss,
2015). During selective coding, findings (i.e., themes and categories) were integrated to facilitate
theory construction. Theoretical codes that described a number of concepts from sociology
(Glaser, 2005) and education (Birks & Mills, 2011) were developed and arranged into different
theoretical schemes that best fitted the data and the larger framework. A critical component of
selective coding involved the review of memos and diagrams that aided in refining the theory.
After significant data collection and analysis, I turned to the literature, comparing the emergent
categories and themes with other research findings and discussed the fit between data, grounded
theory, and scholarly literature. Birks and Mills (2014) recommended the use of techniques such
as the writing of a storyline (narrative) of the grounded theory that will aid the researcher in
identifying gaps in the theory. Using the categories and themes developed throughout the
analysis process, the researcher can translate the descriptive story of the participants; their words,
actions, and emotions, into an analytic story - “a written analytic rendition of the theoretical
formulation” (Corbin & Strauss, 2015, p. 125). The analysis ended with the creation of a
theoretical model on the persistence of SEA Malay students.
80
Memoing and Diagramming
Charmaz (2006) contended that memo writing, “constitutes a crucial method in grounded
theory because it prompts you to analyze the data and codes early in the research process” (p.
72). Memos and diagrams enable grounded theory researchers to “capture meanings and ideas
for one’s growing theory” (Glasser, 1998, p. 178). Writing memos (i.e., written records of in-
depth analysis of the data) and doing diagrams (i.e., schematic representations that describe
relationships between concepts that emerge from the data) took on a prime role during data
analysis. Memos and diagrams acted as powerful analytical tools that directed theoretical
sampling, monitored data analysis, asked questions about the raw data, recorded ideas, explained
concepts, and made statements of relationship that linked different concepts together. They were
conducted simultaneously with coding; helping the researcher linked categories around a central
core category, until the final theory was constructed (Corbin & Strauss, 2015).
The constant process of memoing and diagramming allowed me to record my thoughts
about the comparisons I made to delineate the theoretical properties of codes, concepts,
categories, and their relationships, while they were still current. Each memo and diagram were
dated and given a conceptual heading to make the contents more accessible. Memos and
diagrams that were more conceptual, rather than descriptive, helped me progress the research
forward and keeping a research journal that was separate from memos kept me sentient to biases
and assumptions that can influence interpretations (Corbin & Strauss, 2015). Reviewing memos,
sorting memos, and writing the conceptual summary memo (i.e., a synopsis of the research
findings) aided and abetted theoretical integration, and integrative diagrams that were graphical,
flowing, logic, and clear that focused on categories were pivotal in formulating the grounded
theory.
81
Role of the Researcher
This study relied primarily on interview data and I served as the key research instrument.
My role as the researcher in this study was to make meaning and knowledge about the highly
contextual experiences of SEA Malay students studying abroad without making assumptions and
cultural biases about their persistence actions and interactions. My goal was to set aside
preconceptions, bring experience and sensitivity to the study, give voice to the experiences and
perceptions of SEA Malay participants, and ground the analysis in their data. As the researcher, I
brought in relative experience as a post-secondary administrator in Brunei who has had
responsibility managing recruitment, admission, retention, housing, and financial aid for
Bruneian students. As a former international student in the United Kingdom and a current
doctoral student in the United States, I have also had extensive exposure to the higher education
systems in both countries.
Upon completing my compulsory secondary education in Brunei, I was accepted into an
education program at a local university in Brunei. Sadly, I decided to drop out during my first
semester. I was not struggling with my classes, but for some reason I just felt that the
university’s teaching practices and learning environments were not meeting my needs and
expectations. I had a strong desire to seek and interact with new cultures and was more
motivated to pursue a degree in a foreign country to take full advantage of more engaging
educational experiences. A year later, I enrolled in a university in the United Kingdom in the
Welsh region of Gwynedd that had an ethnicity of 96% White. At that time, I remember having
to willingly assimilate and acculturate into the British-Welsh culture. Throughout my
undergraduate years, I felt that the individual ties I have to my Malay ethnic culture were
considered less important and less relevant for academic success by the university. Despite some
82
challenges, I enjoyed studying as an international student and graduated with a degree in natural
resources after three and a half years. Ten years later, I would return to the same university to
pursue my Master’s degree.
On the contrary, my experiences at the University of Hawaiʻi have made me fully
cognizant of the integral roles that campus climate and cultural sensitivity played in enhancing
the academic experiences and success of students from diverse ethnic and social backgrounds. I
have become mindful of the importance of establishing and maintaining trust with students by
encouraging them to maintain their ethnic values and cultures while living in the dominant
culture. Having spent the entire of my tertiary education in Western educational systems, I
believe that my personal experiences as an international student was valuable for this study.
However, I was aware that the experiences and interactions I had at these two sites could create
biases of viewing the British and American practices as standard which could potentially affect
how I conducted data collection and analysis. I was also aware that previous professional and
personal experiences might bring with me opinions, ideas, assumptions, and lived experiences
that could cause prejudices on the study findings (Heath & Cowley, 2004).
Trustworthiness
The trustworthiness of the study findings was attained by following the procedures
outlined in Corbin and Strauss (2015) which included: (1) data triangulation, (2) member
checking, and (3) using constant comparative analysis. In qualitative research, triangulation of
data is a way of establishing truth in the data provided by the participant (Strauss & Corbin,
1990). Maxwell (1992) commented that triangulation “reduces the possibility of chance by
associations, as well as if systemic biases, thereby allowing greater confidence in any
interpretations made” (Maxwell, 1992, p. 239). It includes the use of various and distinct
83
methods, sources, investigators, and theories to validate interpretations (Onwuegbuzie & Leech,
2007). The processes of member checking and triangulation of multiple sources of data, i.e.
interview data, reflection notes, memos, document reviews, and literature was used to ensure that
all records were not only as accurate and complete as possible, but also rich and meaningful.
The second step for ensuring trustworthiness was carrying out the process of member
checking using digitally recorded interview responses and the journals of the participants.
Charmaz (2003) noted “One useful way for the researcher to check leads and to refine an
analysis is to go back and ask earlier participants about new areas as these are uncovered…to
correct earlier errors and omissions and to construct a denser, more complex analysis” (p. 318).
Each interview was digitally recorded, and all the participants were informed before the interview
that they would be recorded. I transcribed each interview word-for-word (verbatim), coded each
transcript to identify themes and sent the transcriptions of the recordings to each participant for their
review and response. Participants were given the opportunity to react, agree, or provide edits for
transcripts. They confirmed whether the transcripts validated the message that they wanted to
convey. I also tracked my personal assumptions, values, and biases with a reflective journal to limit
researcher bias.
The third step that enhanced the credibility of the data source was the use of constant
comparative analysis of data across participants from diverse data sources (including intentional
selection of students from diverse locations and backgrounds). The diverse perspectives of the
phenomenon were incorporated, shared, and integrated into the analysis of data to prevent biased
conclusions. Additionally, I compared and confirmed interpretations with memos and diagrams.
Following a participant interview, I reviewed relevant documents and literature to further
interpret the participant’s comments and perceptions. The findings from data analysis were also
84
compared and contrasted with current literature regarding international students and diverse
minority student groups.
Limitations
There are limitations that can be associated with this study. In grounded theory, the
researcher acts as the central instrument for data collection, and this constitutes to the primary
limitation of the study. As described in the preceding section, I might have brought with me
opinions, ideas, assumptions, and lived experiences that are different from those of other
researchers. This could affect how I approached data collection, analysis, and cause prejudices
on research findings (Heath & Cowley, 2004). Although the procedures of data collection and
analysis in grounded theory are systematically laid out, Corbin and Strauss (2015) remarked how
access to data, the degree of the researcher’s analytic experience, and the amount of his or her
personal reserves can limit the information that can be discovered. It may be impossible for
every researcher to identify the same relationships between concepts, conditions, action-
interaction, and consequences. The use of data triangulation, member checking, and comparative
analysis were used to minimize personal biases, assumptions, and values.
The methodological approach of the study constituted another limitation. Unlike
quantitative methods that aim to prove hypotheses, the grounded theory approach will limit
generalization. Furthermore, the use of purposeful sampling to select the sample population in
this study adds to this limitation. The study’s population sample was limited to Malay students
from Brunei who had recently successfully completed their undergraduate programs at higher
education institutions in the United Kingdom, Australia, the United States, and New Zealand.
Conducting the study within this setting limited its applicability of the findings in other settings.
85
The use of theoretical sampling ensured that adequate concepts were sampled to make meaning
of participants’ experiences and to construct a theory that is grounded in their data.
86
CHAPTER 4. FINDINGS AND ANALYSES
Chapter Four provides the findings of the grounded theory approach that was applied to
the process of data analysis and includes the results of the analyses pertaining to the research
question. Raw data is presented to illustrate the authenticity of the dialogue. In addition,
participant dialogue that is included in the text is presented verbatim and therefore, has
grammatical and punctuation errors. Five theoretical themes emerged through the processes of
open coding, axial coding, and selective coding which were theoretically integrated to construct
the substantive Model of the Persistence of Southeast Asia Malay Students Studying Abroad.
Description of the Sample
The research question for this study was: How do Malay students from Southeast Asia
persist to degree completion when enrolling in higher education programs in the United
Kingdom, the United States, Australia, and New Zealand? To answer this question, I conducted
semi-structured interviews on 28 Bruneian Malay participants who had successfully completed
their undergraduate programs and recently graduated from colleges and universities in the United
Kingdom, Australia, the United States, and New Zealand. All participants showed academic
persistence and were enrolled semester to semester until the completion of their programs. I
solicited a purposeful sample of 28 Bruneian-Malay out of the 30 possible participants who had
agreed to be interviewed. I did not interview the remaining two potential participants because
data saturation was reached after interviewing 28 participants conducted over a period of twelve
weeks.
Six of the participants were male and 22 were female. 13 participants were enrolled in the
Master of Teaching program at Universiti Brunei Darussalam (UBD), eleven were already
working, and four were still seeking employment or thinking about pursuing their Master’s
87
degrees. Except for one participant who was really keen on sharing his experiences at a medical
school in New Zealand, all the other 27 participants who consented to participate in the study
met the original inclusion criteria i.e., those who had graduated in the last three years from
colleges and universities in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia. According to
the Globe researchers (House et al., 2004), New Zealand is also grouped under the distinct Anglo
culture together with the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United States. For this reason, I
decided to include the additional participant from New Zealand.
Seventeen of the participants graduated from institutions in the United Kingdom, eight
graduated from Australia, two graduated from the United States, and one graduated from New
Zealand. 24 participants were recipients of the Brunei Government scholarship, two participants
acquired loans under the Brunei Government student loan program, and the remaining two were
self-funded students. They attended a wide range of undergraduate programs that included
accounting and finance, art and design, business studies, creative arts, engineering, economics,
English, food science, management, marketing, mathematics, medicine and allied fields, physical
sciences, physiotherapy, psychology, politics, social work, and sport.
To ensure confidentiality, pseudonyms were assigned to each participant and specific
institution names were anonymized (see Table 1). Through interviews, I engaged participants in
conversations that ranged over a broad variety of topics from the process of selecting the
countries and institutions where they studied abroad, initial expectations about their study abroad
programs, their experiences (i.e., academic, cultural, and social) in their host
countries/institutions, the varying actions carried out by institutions to engage students (i.e., both
academically and culturally), to the reasons why Malay students persist or dropout from their
undergraduate programs. The interviews stretched between one to nearly three hours.
88
No Pseudonym Gender Geography Year
Graduated Program
Secondary Education
A-Level O-Level
1 Johana Female United Kingdom July, 2017 Mathematics JIS Public
2 Hani Female United Kingdom July, 2016 Mathematics UK Public
3 Yati Female United Kingdom July, 2017 Accounting & Finance JIS Public
4 Dewi Female United Kingdom July, 2016 Psychology Public Public
5 Azim Male United Kingdom July, 2017 Biology UK Public
6 Sofia Female United Kingdom &
Australia
July, 2016 Mathematics UK Public
7 Zaffran Male New Zealand Jan, 2019 Medicine Public Public
8 Aisha Female United Kingdom July, 2018 Quantity Surveying Public Public
9 Ziana Female United Kingdom July, 2017 International Relations Public Public
10 Hassan Male United Kingdom July, 2017 Accounting & Finance Public Public
11 Suriani Female United Kingdom July, 2017 English Literature JIS Public
12 Amirah Female United Kingdom July, 2018 Physiotherapy Public Public
13 Kamarul Male United Kingdom July, 2017 Sports Science JIS Public
14 Farhan Male United Kingdom July, 2017 Environmental Economics JIS Public
15 Hafiza Female United Kingdom July, 2017 Physics UK Religious
16 Norhanim Female United Kingdom July, 2017 Biology JIS Public
17 Rosma Female United Kingdom July, 2017 Food Science JIS Public
18 Putri Female United Kingdom July, 2017 Design & Technology JIS Public
19 Rahimah Female United Kingdom July, 2017 Management JIS Public
20 Nadira Female United States Dec, 2018 Art & Design JIS Public
21 Yasmin Female Australia Jan, 2019 Health Science & Social Work Public Public
22 Laila Female Australia Jan, 2019 Petroleum Engineering Public Public
23 Zurina Female Australia Jan, 2019 Psychology Public Public
24 Fatimah Female Australia Jan, 2019 Nutrition & Dietetics Public Public
25 Idayu Female Australia Jan, 2019 Speech Pathology Public Public
26 Suria Female Australia Jan, 2019 Physiotherapy Public Public
27 Haziq Female Australia Jan, 2018 Petroleum Engineering Public Public
28 Aida Female United States July, 2018 Psychology JIS Private
Table 1
Description of Sample. A Summarized Profile of Participants.
89
Results of Data Analysis
Data analysis began with the transcribing of each interviews. As sequential bilinguals, a
majority of the participants switched between English and Malay in mid-sentence when
answering interview questions. All words that were spoken in the Malay language were
translated and transcribed in English as accurately as possible. As a native Malay speaker, I
believe that I possess both a correct understanding of all the Malay phrases spoken by
participants as well as a profound knowledge of the cross-cultural differences between the Malay
and English languages. This enabled me to preserve the meanings of the source words and reflect
them in the English text. In addition, copies of the interview transcriptions were sent via e-mail
to each participant for member checking. The interview transcripts were analyzed in NVivo
which involved the three phases of coding i.e., open coding, axial coding, and selective coding.
The first round of line-by-line coding in NVivo produced 367 individual codes and 21
categories. These initial codes and categories were then compared against each other for
similarities and differences. Redundant codes were removed in the ensuing second round of open
coding that culminated in 153 individual codes and 14 categories. Finally, selective coding
generated five theoretical themes that serve as the foundation of the emergent theoretical model
(see Table 2). The following sections present the codes, categories, and the emergent theoretical
model that were developed through these processes of coding.
90
Open Coding Axial Coding Selective Coding
• Assigned descriptive labels
to identify open codes
• Conceptual ordering of data
First round:
367 open codes
21 categories
Second round:
153 open codes
14 categories
• Linking categories through
relationships between
concepts
9 categories
48 sub-categories
• Theoretical integration i.e.,
linked categories around a
theoretical theme
• Developed diagram of the
emerging theoretical model
5 theoretical themes
31 sub-themes
Open Coding
During open coding, the raw data was interpreted line-by-line for meaning and divided
into lower level concepts that summarized different pieces of the data. A total of 367 in-vivo
codes (i.e., using the actual words of the participants) related to the research question were
created to label the emerging concepts. Once lower level concepts were derived, a total of 21
higher level concepts were identified to sort the open codes into different categories according to
their properties and dimensions. Properties are “characteristics or qualities of concepts that
define, give specificity, and differentiate one concept from another” while dimensions are “the
range over which a property can vary” (Corbin & Strauss, 2014, p. 57). A second round of open
coding was then conducted where all the 367 open codes were pulled together and contracted
into a smaller number but more meaningful codes and categories. This involved the removal of
overlapping and redundant codes which resulted in a reduced data that consisted of 153 open
codes and 14 categories (see Table 3 and Table 4).
Table 2
Summary of the three processes and outcomes of coding: open, axial, and selective.
91
Academic challenges
Academic goals
Academic resources
Academic scaffolding
Academic support
Access to help services
Acclimatize to new
weather/climate
Adjust/adapt
Accommodation and living
costs
Adjust/adapt
Approachable and friendly
Availability of housing
close to campus
Balance work and social
life
Be adventurous
Be independent
Brunei embassy support
Brunei Student Union
support
Career or employment
goals
CECE indicators:
• Availability of
holistic support
• Collectivist cultural
orientations
• Cultural community
service
• Cultural familiarity
• Culturally relevant
knowledge
• Culturally validating
environments
• Humanized cultural
environments
• Opportunities for
meaningful cross-
cultural engagement
• Proactive
philosophies
Characteristics of the city
Clinical placements and
internships issues
Commit to goals
Connect with friends
Consumerism
Could not fit in
First choice country or
institution
Fitting in
Got married/pregnant
Group work
Helpful
Helpful actions of the
institution
High School (A-Level
education): Jerudong
International School
High School (O-Level
education): Public high
school
High school teachers’ and
peers’ influence
Higher possibility of being
accepted
Homesick and loneliness
Housemate issues
Inclusiveness
Initial expectations
Initial experiences
Interact with difference
cultures
Interest in program
International students
International student’s
office
Intimidating/not
approachable/
unresponsive
Involvement outside of
class
Join a society to improve
involvement
Language problems/barriers
Lecturers’ reputations
Like the place
Liked the institution
Living off campus
Location of the campus
Look for halal food
Lost interest and passion
Maintain Malay identity
Malay community in host
country’s locality
Malay students
Malaysian friends
Manage and plan finances
Manage time
Meet new people
Mental and emotional
health issues
Mental strength and
determination
Missed orientation
Non-academic challenges
Opportunities to travel
around
Passionate about learning
Passive learner
Perceptions from media
Persistence
Personal goals
Personal limitations
Personal strengths
Physical support
Place offered by institution
Poor academic performance
Popular choice
Pre-departure meet ups and
briefings
Program duration
Program/curriculum
content
Quality of lectures
Table 3
List of 153 concepts generated during Open Coding
92
Racial aggressions, micro-
aggressions,
discrimination
Relationship problems
Religious beliefs
Religious facilities
Rules and policies of the
institution
Safety
Scholarship
Scholarship terminated
Secondary education
preparation
Seek help
Self-belief
Self-efficacy
Social climate
Social club and societies
Social connections
Social life
Socializing and mingling
Spiritual disturbance
Spoon feeding
Students’ satisfaction
Study groups
Substance abuse
Support system
Teaching style
Transitioning
Transportation/commute
Travel to experience host
cultures
Tutorials
Unhelpful actions of the
institution
University housing
University’s ranking,
reputation, and perceived
quality
1. Arrival 8. Institution and country choice
2. Commitment to goals 9. Institutional factors
3. Cultural differences 10. Learning patterns
4. Culturally engaging campus environments 11. Predeparture factors
5. External factors 12. Persistence barriers
6. Faculty and clinical educators 13. Persistence strategies
7. Family and friends 14. Sense of belonging
Axial Coding
The ensuing phase of axial coding involved the processes of constant comparison,
discussions with my advisor, Dr. Lucas, and the construction of data diagrams to construct the
relationships of the 153 codes with each other. As a result, some categories and concepts that
emerged during open coding were absorbed under a smaller and more inferential pattern of
categories and subcategories. It became evident that the categories exhibited a spatiotemporal
relationship in such a way that participants’ persistence changed over a period of time and across
different learning environments depending on their learning interactions. The emerging
categories and subcategories denoted actions, interactions, conditions (i.e., events or
Table 4
List of fourteen categories generated during Open Coding
Table
5
1. Arrival 8. Institution and country choice
2. Commitment to goals 9. Institutional factors
3. Cultural differences 10. Learning patterns
4. Culturally engaging campus
environments
11. Predeparture factors
5. External factors 12. Persistence barriers
6. Faculty and clinical educators 13. Persistence strategies
7. Family and friends 14. Sense of belonging
List of fourteen categories generated during Open Coding
Table 3 continued
93
happenings), and the consequences or outcomes of the actions and interactions. A number of
nine categories and 48 codes emerged at the conclusion of axial coding. Figure 17 show the axial
codes and the relationship between categories and their sub-concepts.
Selective Coding
During selective coding, the nine categories and 48 codes generated from axial coding
were integrated to facilitate theory construction. Ongoing constant comparison was utilized to
develop new theoretical codes and selectively code the categorical connections of the theoretical
Figure 17. Relationships between categories and concept or codes generated by axial coding.
94
themes (see Figure 18). I also constructed visual representations of the emergent relationships
between the categories and their theoretical relevance.
The final theoretical model was developed with five main themes, and 31 sub-categories
(see Figure 19). The model explains Malay students’ success as a longitudinal process which
moves along a continuum that includes four core spatiotemporal stages that are navigated
through by students: (1) Pre-departure, (2) Transition, (3) Institution/Program, and (4) Outcome.
SEA Malay students encounter multiple persistence obstacles (i.e., academic challenges and
cultural differences), and undergo varying levels of persistence at different phases of their study
abroad program, which are influenced to varying degrees by the strategies they use to
successfully navigate these obstacles. I will explain this theoretical model in more detail on page
182.
Figure 18. Theoretical themes that make up the emergent theoretical model.
95
Theme One: Pre-Entry Inputs
Ethnicity, age, and home country. This study discusses how student pre-entry inputs,
characteristics, demographic variables such as ethnicity, age, home country, secondary
education, cultural values, aspirations, and expectations of studying abroad are related to
students’ experiences after arriving at their host countries and institutions. All 28 participants
were traditional-aged students and identified themselves as Bruneian-Malays. Additionally, two
participants mentioned that their parents came from different ethnic backgrounds and were
deeply influenced by both Malay and Chinese values. All of them entered higher education at the
age of 18 or 19 years old, directly after completing their A-Level education in high schools in
Figure 19. The Final Theoretical Model
96
Brunei and in the United Kingdom. Four participants had prior learning experiences at A-Level
boarding schools in the United Kingdom before starting their undergraduate programs.
Secondary education background. Brunei’s 12-year education policy stipulates that
every student complete a minimum of twelve years of education i.e., seven years in preschool
and primary, two years in lower secondary, and a maximum of three years in upper secondary.
Upper secondary education in Brunei is heavily based on the British Ordinary-Level (O-Level)
education system where students would study for their O-Level courses between two or three
years depending on their academic abilities. At this juncture, students are then provided two
progression pathways: (1) two-year British Advanced-Level (A-Level) courses at sixth form
colleges, or (2) technical education programs at a local polytechnic or technical institute. The
British A-Level certification is equivalent to the high school diploma in the United States and is
widely used as the standard for determining admission into universities in the United Kingdom
and Australia. Bruneian students who wish to be admitted into higher education institutions in
the United States would have to take the SAT at a test center in Brunei. Aida described how she
prepared for her A-Level exams and SAT at the same time,
City University is like one of the most, I guess it’s kind of a dream school for a lot of
kids. I also applied to Northwestern and I think CMU, Carnegie Melon. But yeah, those
weren’t really my preferred cities, I guess. I think New York City was top of the list. I
believe I took the SAT three times. Yes, that’s quite normal. So, my last year of high
school while I was studying for A-Levels, I was also studying for SAT. It was kind of
just non-stop study. I know that’s a deterrent for a lot of people, but for me, I thought it
was worth it.
97
Aida indicated that many Bruneian students are less willing to take the SAT and ACT college
admissions exams to enter colleges and universities in the United States.
Every year, a highly select group of students who did well in their O-Level examinations
would also be offered scholarships to do their A-Levels at either a private boarding school in
Brunei (i.e., Jerudong International School, JIS) or at select boarding schools in the United
Kingdom. The intention is to better prepare and equip them for higher education success
overseas. These students are expected to maintain high academic achievements throughout their
studies until the completion of their degree programs. Out of the total 28 study participants,
eleven participants did their A-Levels at JIS, thirteen participants went to public Sixth Form
colleges in Brunei, and four went to different boarding schools in the United Kingdom. Distinct
from other public sixth form colleges in Brunei, JIS adopts a full British education curriculum
where students from around the world benefit from a unique international learning environment
that encapsulates both academic and social-emotional learning. As a result, participants who
went to JIS and those who went to do their A-Levels in the United Kingdom felt that they were
better prepared for a study experience abroad. The multicultural environment at JIS particularly
allowed participants to foster cultural awareness and develop a better appreciation of cultural
pluralism. Accordingly, these participants reported that they experienced easier cultural
adjustment when entering higher education compared to participants who went to mainstream
Sixth Form colleges. For example, Nadira explained how the social and cultural exposure at JIS
impacted her interactions at her new institution in the United States,
I think that’s because I went to JIS honestly. That’s a big factor. I already was exposed to
different cultures, different people, even if it was on a marginalized level. I knew I had a
cue…Because, if you’re thrown into it without any previous experience, you’re not going
98
to know how to react and that’s going to be a bad experience in general. So, you know, I
was very lucky to have had this exposure beforehand.
Farhan who also went to JIS confirmed this,
If I didn’t go to JIS and went to other sixth form schools, then I think I wouldn’t be well
prepared. I’ll be very shocked actually. The government schools, they’re more focused on
the academic achievements not the social bit or how to interact with different cultures.
Four participants had prior experiences transitioning from O-Level education in Brunei to A-
Levels in the United Kingdom before entering higher education. The experience benefited
Sofia’s cross-cultural adaptations when she progressed to higher education. Sofia said,
I grew up to be independent in the United Kingdom. So, by the time I was in Australia, I
thought, yeah, I’d know what to do, I went through this before, I knew what to look for,
and it was much better for me.
“Because I had been in the UK for two years prior to moving to B-City, I didn’t feel that much
different. It felt the same” said Hafiza who spent her A-Level years at a girls’ college in
Gloucestershire, England.
Cultural values. When asked to describe the Malay culture, participants talked about
Malay as a collectivist culture that regards “respect” and “family” as core values. Ziana stated,
“Malays are very respectful to people who are older than them, we are brought up that way.”
Putri mentioned, “In Brunei, family is over everything else. Even when you’re working, you
have to put your family first. But in the U.K., I see work is number one.” Another participant,
Fatimah, described the collectivist nature of Malays, “We help each other, we help our people. In
Australia, I noticed everyone in class liked to work on their own, they’re very individualistic.”
99
Malay cultural values shaped how the participants interacted with faculty and host
country students; both inside and outside of their classrooms. Faculty, staff, and peers are always
treated with utmost respect. Nevertheless, these cultural values or norms can also lead to cultural
misunderstandings. For example, in the Malay culture, it is often considered culturally improper
and disrespectful to criticize or debate in group settings. Criticism, debate, and argument are
usually done privately in one-to-one interactions. Nadira accounted,
The good thing about the Malay culture that I missed the most was sort of like the sense
of respect everyone had for each other. Kind of like what I said earlier when my mom
said, if you have nothing nice to say, don’t say it at all. So, I think actually that’s a really
really good thing like sometimes there is a time in place to not say anything. And I feel
Brunei is like that, we are good at doing that.
Like other participants, Idayu struggled in the early phases of her program trying to adjust to the
new academic culture. In Brunei, students are encouraged to actively participate in class by
asking or answering short questions. However, little impetus is put on encouraging students to
state their individual thoughts or opinions in discussions or debates. Idayu described,
In our Malay culture, there’s this thing, if you don’t have anything different to say, then
don’t say anything. Everybody else were just rephrasing what the previous person was
saying, so what’s the point of me saying the same thing, the same point, when everybody
just rephrased it. That’s one thing that’s different, they all like to talk. They’re just like,
just get out there, just get your thoughts out. But I felt like if everybody else’s thoughts
are the same, why do I have to say it again. I was always forced to talk more otherwise I
will be marked down.
100
“I think we should be encouraged to speak out more (in Brunei schools). I guess it’s our culture,
it’s hard to change that” said Suria. In another instance, Rahimah commented how she had to
explain to people the differences in her cultural beliefs and practices,
One time, I had to go to Bristol as part of my module to meet local businesses and I had
to explain to each of them about my religious beliefs, halal food, the praying, me not
being able to shake hands with the opposite sex. I had to make them understand, and I
told them about these things repeatedly.
Family, friends, and the Malay community played a central role in participants’ lives,
activities, decision-making and goals-setting. When it came to decision-making, participants
made choices regarding higher education by considering and respecting the opinions of family
members especially parents. For example, Farhan abandoned his intention of going to the United
States because he failed to convince his parents that it would be a safe place for him to study.
According to Farhan,
I wanted to apply to the University of Pennsylvania. But then, my parents did not really
support the idea of me going to the U.S. They were like, maybe try somewhere else, like
the U.K. They heard things like gun control issues in the U.S. They got really concerned
about my safety.
On top of that, achieving success in higher education is more than just a personal goal for
participants. Completing higher education and coming home with a degree would also mean
success for the whole family and vice-versa. Haziq commented, “The fact that we value family
more than other things, brings into the picture like, when we’re studying, we would think that
yeah, we’re doing this not only for ourselves, but also for our family.”
101
Conversely, participants expressed the Malay culture as being “rigid,” “restrictive,”
“strict,” “closed,” and “judgmental.” Participants felt that studying abroad not only afforded
them the learning opportunities that are lacking in Brunei, but also offered them higher levels of
freedom and individuality. The huge cultural distance that exists between home and their host
countries presented them the opportunity to break from seemingly rigid Malay cultural traditions,
customs, and structures. Hafiza expressed these sentiments,
Maybe the Malay culture is a little bit judgmental. Especially when you’re here in Brunei,
you are restricted from doing many things you want to do. But then, when you are away
(abroad), you do get more freedom and you’d do things you don’t normally do in Brunei.
The Malay culture, it’s very closed. That’s not necessarily a bad thing or a good thing.
Maybe if we were a bit more open, then there’d be a lot less critique or judgment.
All participants cited their host countries as “accepting,” “tolerant,” and “friendly,” which
equally accommodated their cultural adjustment experiences. Yati conveyed, “It’s multicultural
there, they’re so accepting, and I like that they’re friendly people. I actually got culture shocked
when I came home to Brunei, like, everyone was serious.” Notwithstanding the various academic
and sociocultural challenges, all participants expressed how much they enjoyed their living
experiences abroad.
Aspirations. Participants sought to acquire high quality tertiary education by enrolling at
universities in the United Kingdom, Australia, the United States, and New Zealand. For Bruneian
students, the United Kingdom has traditionally been and is still the most popular destination
abroad for higher education followed by Australia. More students are now considering the
United States for higher education as they begin to realize the reputation, prestige, and benefit of
graduating with a degree from an American higher education institution. In addition, participants
102
hoped that the cross-cultural interactions abroad would provide them with perspective changing
experiences that they can celebrate and bring into use when they return home. “I wanted to study
abroad to gain more knowledge, experience the different culture, so I can apply the knowledge
and experiences here in Brunei” said Fatimah.
This study found several important motivating factors that compelled Bruneian Malay
students to enroll at a college or university abroad: (1) the university’s ranking and reputation,
(2) program content and suitability, and (3) ease of the admission process. Like many of her
peers, Suriani wanted to enroll in a top-ranking university, but also made sure the program
matched her career aspirations. She stated,
I looked at the rankings, I went on the (university) website, and I looked at all the
modules they offered, whether they would be useful for me. Especially, because I knew I
was going to be a teacher. So, that’s why I wanted to make sure what I was going to learn
would benefit my career in Brunei.
Nadira emphasized how she valued the university’s reputation when making her choice.
Ocean University is one of the most prestigious school like the hardest one to get into
especially for Americans, for art and design especially. There’s a lot of notable figures
that I looked up to that went to school there, they’re alumni. It seemed almost impossible
for me to get in. But, then, the moment I realized I got in I was like, I already knew my
choice. Pretty straightforward process for me.
For Ziana however, program content and suitability were more important than institutional
rankings. She said,
You know, you can’t care too much about the university’s ranking because like, if this is
a really good university and you can get in but then, if they don’t have the modules
103
(courses) that you want, why go there? You’re not going to enjoy it and you might as
well go elsewhere.
In addition to the university’s reputation and prestige, the applicability of the degree program to
their future career choices is an equally important factor that were prioritized by participants.
Communicating with the universities at a distance was a challenge for the participants.
Because of this, the ease of the admission process was also a major factor. Hafiza noted,
“Riverside University was my first choice, because of rankings but also because they didn’t
require people to pass their entrance interview. They had interviews but whether you get in or
not is not based on your interview results.” Putri initially thought about going to the United
States, but later changed her mind because that meant she would have to prepare and sit for an
additional entrance test. She said,
I had to sit for the SAT if I wanted to study in the U.S. I had already done my A-Levels
and did well in my exams, so taking the SAT wasn’t convenient for me. And I heard that
the SAT is tough too, that’s why I didn’t want to take the test.
Participants felt more encouraged to apply to universities that had less complex admission
processes. Entrance interviews and tests were not only inconvenient, but also added extra anxiety
and expense.
Pre-departure expectations. Participants talked about academic and sociocultural
expectations and perceptions they had before arriving at their host countries. Several themes
emerged such as “expectations of developing friendships with local students,” “expectations of
discrimination and racism,” and “academic expectations.” Some of these expectations conformed
to on-site realities, but some were unmet. For example, Hassan expressed his disappointment
about not being able to establish meaningful intercultural connections with local students at his
104
university, “Before going to the U.K., I was hoping to be friends with the locals there. But
throughout the years that I was there, I never had any real local friends. All my friends were
international students.” Such disparity between expectations and reality caused some emotional
stress to participants that pushed them to make necessary adjustments. In Hassan’s case, he
negotiated this unexpected difficulty by seeking familiarity and forming friendships with
international students. Another participant, Azim, expected that he would have more study
friends from his program to work on assignments together. “One thing that was not met was
mostly, I thought, okay I’m probably going to have a lot of uni friends to talk to. And then
whenever we have assignments, we can talk about it. I didn’t have that” said Azim. Thus,
participants were surprised by the unexpected difficulties they faced when trying to form
friendships with host country students.
Many participants arrived at their host countries with expectations of discrimination and
racism which triggered initial bouts of fear and distress. Norhanim, when asked why she did not
apply to any universities in the United States, said, “I’m just scared of the, you know, the recent
issues with Trump. I’m scared of all the racist slurs.” In reality, several participants encountered
incidents that they perceived as discriminating and racist behaviors. This expectation led to
changes in participants’ perceptions about the host country and shaped how they viewed their
higher education experiences abroad. Haziq told a story about one incident that happened when
he was taking his mom and sisters around Sydney,
I felt that in Sydney, racism is not a big issue. But there was one time when my sisters
and mom were with me, and I heard someone in the background saying that we’re
terrorists. When that happened, I felt hurt and angry. It made me feel unsafe a bit because
if that was what they really thought about us, we wouldn’t know what else they would do
105
to us. They were saying that because my sisters and mom were wearing tudong (Malay
word for female hijab or head scarf).
On the other hand, Laila’s expectation of racism was not fulfilled entirely. She explained,
I didn’t experience any racist aggressions, but my Malaysian friend, she was walking,
wearing her tudong, and someone in a car threw water at her. And then yeah, you’d meet
drunk people on the streets who’d say bad things about Muslims. I didn’t wear tudong
when I was in Australia and I didn’t experience all these. Generally, I felt safe in Sydney.
Participants were concerned about their safety, but noted that the majority of the racially
aggressive incidences they encountered, occurred outside of their campuses.
Furthermore, participants revealed mismatches between their academic expectations and
academic experiences abroad. Some participants expected that there would be less time for
classes and more independent self-directed study compared to high school. “I think over there,
there was more of the independent learning stuff. We’re so used to being spoon fed here
academic-wise. But then, when we were there, it was all on our own” said Norhanim. They also
expected teaching styles to be different from what is usually practiced back home, academic
facilities to be modern and up-to-date, and more exposure to faculty that represent diverse
cultural backgrounds. Suriani expected that her English literature program would also include
meaningful out-of-class activities. “I thought there was going to be a lot of field visits. And I was
right. We visited cathedrals, looked at places where medieval literature originated. We had a lot
of visits” she said. On the other hand, Rahimah recounted the disconnect between her academic
expectations and her on-site experiences,
I thought the lectures and all the learning I was going to do would be different, or
something new, like how they teach would be different. But I was kind of disappointed
106
because I thought it would be more modern, less lecture-based, and that there would be
more international lecturers.
Lastly, Idayu elicited how her academic expectations were shaped by advice, personal stories
and conversations she had with her brothers,
Both of my brothers are graduates from the Isle University. They’ve always told me how
important it is to be independent, to manage your finances, etc. They kept things realistic
like, oh, it’s not going to be only fun, you’ll always be at home doing work, studying, so
try to socialize more. That made me think that it’s going to be hard there like,
transportation problems, living in the same house with other people you don’t really
know, that is not going to be fun. So, my expectations were pretty low. I just wanted to
get my degree.
Participants’ experiences were influenced by the differences between expectations and on-site
realities. Consequently, how they negotiated and responded to these differences had significant
impacts on their academic persistence.
Theme Two: Transition into New Culture
Participants consistently highlighted important actions, interactions, conditions, and
outcomes they encountered during the first few weeks upon arriving in their host country and
institution. These included: (1) housing, (2) social connections, (3) language problems, (4)
dietary restrictions, (5) goals-setting, (6) adjustment, and (7) utilizing personal skills and
dispositions. All participants traversed the same sequence or patterns of emotions after arriving.
During the first couple of weeks, participants completed an initial “honeymoon phase” where
they described being excited and enthusiastic about exploring the new socio-cultural
environment. Amirah described her initial experience after arriving in London,
107
All of us stayed in London for a week before we went to K City. We went sightseeing, it
was my first time in London, it felt different being in a big city. We went on an adventure
together especially when trying out the underground tube. That first week, I wasn’t
feeling homesick because I was having fun with my friends.
Participants underwent a fun and exciting “honeymoon phase” that ended quickly once classes
began.
Entering the second phase, the initial feelings of excitement and enthusiasm quickly
disappeared. Participants began to experience less-positive emotions such as homesickness,
loneliness, and being overwhelmed. This is mainly accentuated by the loss of contact with close
family members, cultural dissonance, participants’ need to belong, and the emergence of
academic and social challenges. This stage lasted between several weeks to 12 months. “After
my parents left, that’s when the loneliness kicked in. It was hard” said Yasmin. Yati described
how she had problems fitting in during her first weeks of classes,
At first, I thought maybe it’s just because I’m new so, I kind of ignored it. But then, over
time, in class and out of class, I didn’t really have anyone to talk to. Sometimes, they did
talk to me, but only because I’m sitting right next to them. But that’s it.
Homesickness is a concept that is prevalent amongst all the participants particularly during the
first year of their programs. Aida shared her experience being homesick during her first six
months in the United States,
I think I felt homesick maybe the first semester, especially the first few months were a bit
hard. I didn't anticipate it to be so hard. But yeah, I would just be there like crying, but I
don't know, I didn't really call home either. But it kind of just passed you know, you
adjust slowly. Being such a big school can sometimes feel like you're really alone.
108
Especially as an international student, sometimes you’re homesick. You know, it's like
finding food that you can eat, finding friends. But I think it would have been nice to have
like, a bit more sense of community, because sometimes you do miss home. You do miss
the food. And you just want to be with someone who gets it. Someone you can speak
your language with.
Coming to terms with homesickness and learning to live in a new culture were some of the most
difficult parts that participants experienced when they study abroad.
During the third phase, participants developed coping strategies that allowed them to
adjust to their new academic and social cultures. How fluid they experienced transition from
honeymoon to this coping phase depended on the availability of quality support and how they
utilized their individual strengths and dispositions to navigate emerging challenges. Along with
seventy other Bruneians, Laila transferred to a university in Australia after completing her first
two years of higher education at a local university in Brunei. “It was very confusing at first. Then
as time went by, we kind of get the hang of most things. Like we took the initiative to learn many
things on our own, to catch up with the program” said Laila.
Housing. The first major obstacle most participants encountered upon arrival was
searching for a house to live. 23 participants chose not to stay at university residence halls and
lived off-campus instead; mainly because of the high rates of student housing. “University
housing was really expensive. A room costs nearly £600 per month and that’s just too expensive
for us. I was only getting like £620 from the government each month (subsistence allowance)”
said Aisha. Similarly, Zurina stated she could not afford to pay for her university’s on-campus
housing in Australia, “The fee was high, and they wanted us to pay the lump sum for the whole
semester too. So that’s too much.” Living off-campus not only allowed participants to save
109
money, but also the freedom to choose their roommates. Sharing a house with culturally similar
people from Brunei and Malaysia allowed participants to maintain strong ties with their ethnic,
cultural, and religious identity. “I wanted to save money, so I decided to look for a cheaper house
with other Bruneians. Why Bruneians? The culture’s the same. Food and language are same too,
so it was easy to live together,” said Kamarul. Suria stated that student housing at her university
did not provide meals that met her dietary needs as a Malay and Muslim student, “On-campus,
we’re not allowed to cook. Meals were prepared, but there was no halal food, they only had
vegetarian. They had international student houses, but then, they didn’t provide halal food there
either.” Suriani commented that she felt more comfortable living with people she knew from
home, “We knew each other. Two (roommates) were my friends from MS (high school). There
wasn’t much risk like, oh, I don’t really know him. Since we’re all Bruneians, you kind of
understand and know what to expect.” Living off-campus was a positive way for participants to
save money, team up with roommates who share a similar culture, and provided the advantage of
cooking their own halal meals.
Two-thirds of the participants arrived without securing accommodation before they left
home. With hardly any knowledge on the rental market situation and the options available in
their sojourn locations, participants found it particularly stressful looking for off-campus
housing. “It wasn’t a nice experience. We couldn’t find a house to live. We stayed at a friend’s
house for a while and that was hard, bit cramped” said Johanna. Rosma described the challenges
she faced,
When we arrived, we stayed at a hotel for a couple of days. And then we stayed a friend’s
place for another week. I think it was mostly like, being confused how the housing
110
process was like there. And then, when we actually found a place, the landlord told us
that we had to wait for a week or two for him to sort out the place and fix things.
Haziq had much the same experience when he arrived in Australia. He found it hard to focus on
his academics because he was desperately looking for a house to live. He described, “It took us
three weeks to find a house. So that first few weeks were hard because we couldn’t really unpack
our stuff, I was sleeping on the couch, and my first course test was already coming up.” It took a
while for participants to find and secure places that were suitable and affordable to live. They
had difficulties navigating the local housing market due to a lack of understanding of rental
systems and legal frameworks surrounding the housing landscape.
One participant, Norhanim, reported that her university’s housing office offered resources
and information about off-campus housing. In fact, Norhanim’s search for a house was less
frustrating compared to other participants because her university’s housing office made extra
efforts to help her. They went beyond providing information about available off-campus housing
to establishing house viewing appointments for her. Norhanim said,
That week we didn’t have a house yet and we went to the university to get help. They
helped us look for accommodation and suggested four different houses close to campus,
which were within my budget too. They were really helpful because they called back a
day after to let us know that they had a viewing set up for us. Within three days we found
one.
Such helpful actions by the housing office not only facilitated easier transition, but also protected
incoming international students like Norhanim from being financially taken advantage of by
local landlords.
111
Participants who lived off-campus also chose to stay in close proximity to other Malay
students from Brunei or Malaysia, forming enclaves of small Malay communities around
campuses. When she first arrived in Australia, Idayu stayed with Malaysian friends while
looking for her own place to live. She accounted, “We were living with Malaysians. I was asking
where are the Australians?! They were just Malaysians, lots of Malaysians. I was like, did I go to
Australia or did I just go to Malaysia? I was thinking, where are the international people?”
Living around familiar people from Brunei and Malaysia, provided participants with excellent
community support similarly available at home, which consequently relieved them from
homesickness and loneliness. Rahimah said, “The seniors (Bruneians), they wanted the
Bruneians to live in the same area so that we can help each other.” “I don’t think I relied that
much on the university for most things. I relied more on the senior Bruneians there,” said
Norhanim. Nevertheless, being isolated from other students on campus had negative
repercussions on their cross-cultural interactions and sense of belonging. Yati said,
The first few weeks were not as I expected. It was hard to fit in especially because I
wasn’t living in the halls. There were a lot of activities in the halls, but I didn’t live there
so I couldn’t relate to what they were all talking about and all the parties they attended.
Living on-campus enabled Nadira to develop more friendships with her host country students.
She described her first year living in the dorms,
My school, each of the dorms were very proactive in having event nights. So, there would
be open night or like movie night. And then, there was the World Cup, one of the soccer
football things going on. And then they would have DJ night. There was just a lot, but I
wouldn’t go to all of them either, but they always had free donuts or something so I
would go down for a little bite. So, I would spend most of my time doing that during my
112
free times in school. In the dorms making friends was easy. Because everybody that was
placed there in certain dorms were mostly freshmen, except for our RAs. All these
freshmen, they wanted to make friends, we all wanted to not be lonely. I wanted to make
friends, I wanted to find people to do stuff with.
Living on campus allowed participants to become part of the campus community. They felt less
alienated and were able to develop closer bonds with host country students. On the other hand,
living off campus was pleasing for participants because they lived with peers from the same
country and people from similar cultural backgrounds. Off-campus accommodation afforded
participants the sense of community and family that is very similar to home.
Social connections. This sub-category describes significant and long-lasting
psychological and emotional connections participants formed with communities on campus.
Positive social connections with individuals and groups had considerable impacts on
participants’ transition experiences which also appeared to increase their sense of belonging,
academic motivation, and persistence. Participants noted forming social connections on campus
such as clubs and societies, associations, students’ unions, faculty, programs, departments, and
residence hall communities. They searched for people who they knew could provide the care and
support that they needed, people who shared similar interests and goals, and especially people
who they could associate at a personal level. They expressed their desires to be socially
connected on and off campus, to both the Malay as well as the domestic student communities.
While they valued social connections with individuals from their own culture, participants also
understood that confining their relationships to only the Malay community would not maximize
their well-being.
As soon as they arrived at their institutions, participants sought familiarity and
113
connections with other Bruneians and Malays on campus. “I was lucky because I got in contact
with the Bruneian community there. We looked for other people that were arriving in Ocean
City, and we planned a meetup” said Putri. When Farhan first arrived, he barely knew anyone on
campus and was struggling to find connections. The Students’ Union at his university eventually
got him connected to one of their student ambassadors, who was also from Brunei. Farhan
conveyed,
They showed me pictures of student ambassadors who volunteered to give assistance to
new students arriving on campus. One of them was a Bruneian girl. If they hadn’t told me
that she was Bruneian, I wouldn’t have known. Yeah, when they realized that I was from
Brunei, they gave me her contact details and told me to get in touch with her.
Participants also looked for commonalities with other students in class. For example, Nadira
accounted,
A lot of my friends were all like of different ethnicities, but grew up in a different place.
We were all third culture kids. That’s something we talked about and we united on. I had
a Chinese friend who grew up in Germany and he sounded like a German, he spoke
fluent German. English was his second language and German was his first language, but
he’s Chinese. So, a lot of my friends were like that. That’s how we all became close
together.
However, some participants found it hard at first to connect to their course mates. Kamarul
shared his experience during the initial few weeks of classes,
It was a bit hard to find friends because at that time I still remember that I was the only
Malay in my course. The others were Europeans, locals, and two Chinese international
114
students. As the only Malay, it was bit hard for me to communicate, everyone was talking
really fast.
When this happened, participants looked outside of their programs and departments for some
kind of social connection. Yati stated, “After class there was no one to talk to. So, I just turned to
the Bruneians and joined the Bruneian Students Society.” These early connections helped eased
and stabilized participants’ transition into the new social and academic culture.
Furthermore, participants were quick to develop strong bonds with the Malay community
on campus. Norhanim described,
We’re really close with the Malaysian society (students’ association on campus). During
‘Eid, if we didn’t go home, we would have open houses. So, we would go to their houses
and eat, and they would come and visit us. It was mainly with the Southeast Asians like
the Malaysians, Indonesians, Singaporeans, and Bruneians. We have similar culture and
we understood each other.
The development of strong ties within the close-knit communities of Malay students emulated a
feeling of family connections. Putri shared,
We found ourselves going to each other’s houses more often. We helped each other, ate
together, went to the library together, and hung out together. That was one of the most
memorable experience, to be able to have people around you, but also live independently.
“The Bruneians in K-City, they’re my K-City family” said Amirah. “We saw them like our
brothers and sisters” said Suriani. For Rosma, the Bruneians provided her the support network
she needed. “The Bruneians, they’re always there for us. It’s so nice to have that” said Rosma.
These examples revealed that during the early phase of their transition, participants tended to
115
identify with individuals or communities that possessed similar backgrounds, personalities,
beliefs, values, and interests akin to their own.
Another factor instrumental in stabilizing the transition experiences of the participants
was the Bruneian Students Societies on campus. All participants in this study were involved in
the administration and management of Bruneian Students Societies across campuses in the
United Kingdom and Australia. These societies are established under the aegis of the Students’
Unions of their respective universities. These Bruneian Students Societies look after the welfare
of all Bruneian students on campus and organize events and activities that bring all Bruneians
together. “We were a society under the Students’ Union” said Rosma, who was President of the
Brunei Students Society at the Sky University. “We registered our Brunei society with the
university, and that made it easier for us to book university facilities for our events” said
Rahimah. Bruneian Students Societies were pivotal as platforms that validated participants’
cultural values and norms. They held events and activities that promoted Bruneian cultures to the
local campus communities. Yati, the President of the Bruneian Students Society at Time
University said, “We participated in Global Village, shared our culture, and won second place.”
Additionally, they acted as important intermediaries between international students’ offices and
the Bruneian students. Kamarul stated, “I was vice-president of the Bruneian society and they,
people at the international student’s office, they checked in on us all the time. They kept asking
me, what’s going on? Anything wrong? Are you guys okay?” Yati also shared her intermediary
role, “They (the university) conduct pre-departure briefings in Brunei before new students fly off
to Southampton. So, they would ask me to help connect them to the right person in Brunei who
can assist with the briefings.”
116
In addition to the “compulsory” Bruneian Students Society, many participants mentioned
that they were then able to expand their social networks by establishing multiple connections
with other societies, clubs, and programs on and off campus. Farhan described, “The clubs, the
societies, I joined a lot. The Bruneian society was compulsory for me to join. But I also joined
the Malaysian and Korean societies.” Zaffran was able to improve his public speaking skills by
joining a club near campus. “I also joined this conversational group called the toastmasters club
where you get to practice some public speaking in front of the locals,” said Zaffran. Similarly,
Haziq accounted that participating in activities in the photography club of his university allowed
him to form new friendship with both local and international students. He stated, “I was able to
make new friends, Australians and other international friends, by joining activities in the
photography club. Everyone (in the photography club) was kind of new so it was easier for me to
make new friends.” Aida also commented establishing connections with students from various
backgrounds,
I think, with the interconnectedness of people nowadays, just in general, sometimes
you’d find that your friend is friends with someone that you know. So, I think that’s
really cool. Finding all these connections, even though we come from different
backgrounds.
Participants had significantly more interactions with host country students through their
involvements in extra-curricular activities and campus clubs which impacted their sense of
belonging positively.
Many participants also formed connections with religious associations on campus. “The
Islamic Society was really good. We had a few Suraus (Muslim prayer rooms) around campus.
117
One had a small pantry where you can eat, so I’d go there in between classes. We talked, shared
our thoughts about religion” said Rosma. Hafiza accounted,
ISOC (Islamic Society) had different programs, like help the elderly. Every month they
had different activities. I joined these activities whenever they were held on campus.
People at ISOC knew us by our names. They’re all nice people. I went there every week.
They provided a prayer room for us, there were always people there from different parts
of the world and you could always talk to them.
Participants’ involvements in religious groups and memberships in cultural organizations were
positively related to their sense of connectedness.
For other participants, living in campus residence halls allowed them to have more
interactions with other students from diverse backgrounds outside of their classrooms. During
her first two years in the United States, Nadira was the only Bruneian-Malay enrolled in her
institution. “The (Bruneian) community that was there in New York City, it was small” said
Nadira. Nevertheless, Nadira was able to form long lasting connections with individuals she met
at her dormitory. “The people that I'm friends with now and I still keep in contact, they were my
friends in the dorm that I ended up hanging out with in the common area” said Nadira. Aida, who
was also studying in New York, accounted similar emotional connections with her dormitory
roommates, “My first-year roommates are actually like my best friends now still.”
The data also revealed that participants developed social connections at different times,
some quite early during the program, and some at later stages of their programs. For Azim and
Amirah, their experiences underwent dramatic changes when they were able to get into their
universities’ futsal and dance teams. Amirah decided to join her university’s soccer team at a
118
time when her academic motivation was declining because she was getting over exhausted with
classes and clinical placements. She described her connection with her futsal team,
My personal highlight was when I tried out for the women’s football (soccer) team at K-
City because I wanted to try something new. I made it into the Futsal team, not the
football team but I was still representing the university. Although I was on the bench, as a
substitute most of the time, I was happy. I didn’t get to play every game, but I was very
happy.
Azim formed a strong sense of connection to his dance club much later during the third year of
his program. He admitted that the connection he had with his academic program was not as
strong as the connection he formed with the university’s dance club. Azim shared,
I tried out for the uni’s street dance group and I got in. That was when I really had fun in
uni. I thought that was when I had actually experienced uni life because I was actually
meeting new people, making new friends. They had classes every week on top of our
own group practice. It was hectic, but it was fun and worth it. I actually enjoyed myself. I
finally got to know a lot more people who weren’t in my courses and weren’t Bruneians.
And I thought I should have done that during my first year. We won three golds and one
silver for the university. I was really happy. Basically, we placed in every competition we
participated. I travelled with the group, there were sixteen of us and it was fun. In four
competitions we won six trophies!
Some participants found that social connections were not always as easy and quick to develop.
Amirah and Azim faced difficulties establishing positive social connectedness, but once they did,
their psychological well-beings improved drastically.
119
In several cases, participants’ social connections also led to the development of a
dynamic group identity, one that shifted from time to time. “It’s like this, if you don’t feel like
you belong in the Bruneian Society, people will go join the Malaysian society,” said Norhanim.
For Fatimah, her connection shifted towards her Malaysian friends as they helped her endure her
worst challenge abroad. Fatimah described,
My Malaysian friends, they were very nice. They’re like, yes, I do have many things to
do, but you’re also one of the things that I need to take care too. Yeah, they’re very
caring. Like my friend, she had her thesis to write, but she still took care of me. That’s
why I left the house and stayed with my Malaysian friends. My Bruneian friends, they
helped but it was not enough for me. They had other things to do, and those things were
their priorities. This Malaysian friend, she had taken care of her friend who also had
depression before. So, she brought me to the doctor, took care of me for the whole four
months, while she was also doing her thesis.
Many participants reported challenges in developing social connections when they first arrived
on campus. Eventually, they discovered campus societies, clubs, and associations that brought
culturally disparate individuals together to share a common interest or goal. More crucially, these
clubs and societies provided a unique social setting outside of classrooms that enabled
participants to develop a stronger sense of belonging.
Lastly, student-faculty connections were also highlighted by participants. Most
participants described faculty as approachable and helpful. “My lecturers were amazing, they’re
very personable, approachable. Even though I didn’t talk to them that much directly, they were
really great, supportive” said Idayu. Nadira shared some memorable experiences she had with
her teacher,
120
Sometimes after class, my teacher would be like, let’s go for dinner. And as a whole class
we will go for dinner sometimes. Sometimes, outside of class, I would see them like I’d
meet at a coffee shop if I have questions about work and everything. And then, other
times, we’ve gone for our teacher’s birthday that we, my friends organized to surprise
him. One time we showed up outside our professor’s apartment with a cake outside his
door on his birthday.
Participants felt more satisfied when they were able to build positive connections with faculty
through both in- and out-of-class interactions.
In the United Kingdom, it is common practice for universities to assign individual
students with a personal tutor i.e., a faculty member who would offer one-to-one guidance,
coaching, and advising. Throughout his undergraduate years, Kamarul and his personal tutor
enjoyed a supportive student-faculty relationship; they built trust and communicated effectively.
His personal tutor was consistently available for him and was committed to see Kamarul
succeed. Kamarul described,
He knew that I was totally new there so he would keep sending me emails to find out how
I was doing. He was my personal tutor for three years. Yeah, we had a really good
relationship from first year till my final year. He’d check on me if I had done things I’m
supposed to do, like, are you on track with this? He taught me in one of my modules too.
So, he’d guide me what to do next, which modules to take. When I get my results, we’ll
talk about them and start discussing like, what I should do next for my second year. And
I’d go to him when I have other issues too. Every semester, I’d go meet him like four
times. We had compulsory meetings, but these were not. I’d just go in and talk to him. I
felt that he was a person that I could rely on as it was hard for me there. And oh, I
121
preferred to talk to my personal tutor rather than going to other places. He’s really
helpful. He would always have time to meet me. So yeah, I felt comfortable talking and
meeting him.
However, several participants also mentioned that it was hard for them to form strong
connections with faculty. For example, Haziq expressed how his connections with faculty were
not of the same quality as the student-faculty connections he formed with his previous
professors. Haziq accounted,
The lecturers at UTB (Brunei), I’m not sure why, maybe they could focus on teaching
and talking to students more. It was very easy to reach them. I learned so many things,
just by talking to my lecturers, and them sharing their experiences with me. I remember
one of the lecturers (in Brunei), I can just walk into his office, and we would talk about
everything. And I can ask him anything. It wasn’t like that at South University, although
some of them were helpful. Over there, the lecturers were too busy to talk about things
with you. It was strictly business. They were too busy with their own research work, their
postgraduate students, students that they were mentoring and all. Some of them were hard
to reach.
A similar story was described by Sofia,
I actually broke down in front of one of my lecturers here in Brunei. You see, talking to a
Bruneian lecturer in Brunei is different. And I talked to other lecturers too here, not just
one. It feels more comfortable talking to them here compared to the lecturers overseas. I
don’t know, they didn’t even want to know.
Positive student-faculty relationships played a crucial role in maintaining participants’ academic
and emotional well-beings. Although participants appeared to reach out to friends first whenever
122
they encountered problems, all of them shared that they needed supportive student-faculty
connections to be successful in their programs.
Language problems. Language proficiency allowed some participants to experience
easier cultural adjustment, whereas lack of English language proficiency was a main stressor that
created a barrier for many participants in their academic and social interactions. When asked
about her initial first weeks of her sojourn experience, Suriani responded, “Well, that was easy.”
Suriani arrived in the United Kingdom with an advanced level of English proficiency which
facilitated her adjustment. She added, “Most people think that I was from the U.S. I was
surprised.” Another participant, Yati, commented, “I think it depends on your English
proficiency. If you’re more confident in using English, then it would be easier for you.”
On the contrary, more than two-thirds of the participants mentioned that their academic
and social adjustments were limited by their English language proficiency which subsequently
implicated their confidence levels. For example, Yasmin stated, “During my first year I was
quite reserved. In class, I would get intimidated. I think that’s because I wasn’t confident,
probably because of my English, scared of saying the wrong things.” “When I first arrived, I felt
like there was a language barrier. Most of the time, I was only talking to Malay speakers. It took
me a little bit of time to get used to it” said Rosma. Putri explained how her English proficiency
level affected her confidence when participating in class,
In Brunei, we never speak in English in full sentences. It was always a mix. I'm okay
with English. But when I first got to the U.K., I wasn’t as good, and I had to talk slowly.
Especially when I'm participating in discussions or tutorials. They would ask me to
justify, but I would have a hard time explaining what I actually meant. I felt I was a bit
disadvantaged because the locals or the Europeans and the international students, they
123
were more used to speaking English. They could explain more or say what they meant,
all in greater depth. But I couldn't. I had the language barrier. They could articulate, they
could speak more spontaneously and concisely. They wanted me to explain more, but I
couldn’t. And also, language-wise, I wasn’t really comfortable or confident enough to
challenge my lecturers or classmates.
Suria described her difficulties using English in class,
That was one of my challenges because my English wasn’t that fluent. I wouldn’t say that
it’s bad, but I wasn’t that fluent. My vocabulary was also limited, and expressing my
ideas, expressing my feelings, those were hard for me. Because of that, I wasn’t keen on
sharing my thoughts and opinions with other people. So, I would rather keep quiet and
just listen to them.
Participants’ English language proficiency levels varied significantly according to their prior
English language learning experience. In general, all of them were already competent English
readers and writers when they entered higher education. However, two-thirds of the participants
identified that they had difficulties in engaging with conversational English which affected their
interactions in the classroom.
Although Bruneians start learning the English language as an academic subject at an
early age in primary school, English is rarely used as a language for social interactions outside of
classrooms. Moreover, English language instruction approaches in public primary and secondary
schools in Brunei seemed to be more reading- and writing-focused rather than more speaking-
focused. Haziq elucidated this point,
124
I think one of the most important skill that we need to have before we go study overseas
is to have better English, spoken English. In MS (high school), that wasn’t the main focus
for teachers. In government primary schools, where I went to, we didn’t speak much in
class, it was better to keep quiet, that’s our culture. I believe students who went to private
primary schools spoke better English because they were given opportunities to speak
more. I never had that strong confidence talking in English in high school. Only at UTB
did I learn more about how to speak better. We had this module called communication
skills. It focused on public speaking and giving presentations. That module really helped
me gain my confidence speaking in front of people. That helped me in Australia.
Participants shared a strong case for change in English learning practices in primary and
secondary schools in Brunei so that students will be more actively engaged in the classroom.
They also indicated the need for universities to develop services or courses designed to help
international students improve their communication and oral presentation skills.
Some participants appeared to have overestimated their English language proficiency,
but then struggled to have colloquial conversations with host native speakers. “English may not
be a problem, but how to joke around, what to talk about, what words to use, that’s bit hard” said
Amirah. “Most of the times, when my lecturers were making jokes, my friends were laughing but
I was like, what?” said Hani, who grappled to comprehend informal, casual conversations.
Yasmin described how her personal struggle with the English language caused her anxieties
during her clinical placement at a hospital in Australia,
There were days that I couldn't speak English well. I had bad days when I just couldn’t
speak proper English. This one time, one day during placement I kept on speaking Malay,
all these Malay words just kept coming out. I was like, I'm sorry I told them, I apologized
125
to them. Yeah, that day, I had to do an assessment with another client too. So, I had to
speak English all the way and I struggled, and I know that my sentencing was all over the
place. So, it wasn't just that one day, sometimes in uni too, randomly. Yeah, I would say
language was a problem for me, although some people do say I speak good English. But I
think, there were some days that were just not good. People there, they were very
understanding. They were like, it’s alright we can still understand you. But they knew,
something was wrong. So, I think that was one of my challenges. My writing was okay,
but the speaking was not.
On days when things go poorly for her, Yasmin was often filled with apprehension at having to
use the English language which negatively affected her performance during her placements. Her
language anxiety might have been triggered by her exposure to an unfamiliar work culture and
fear of being negatively evaluated by people she was consulting.
Participants’ comprehension was further complicated by the wide range of different
English accents they heard. Participants highlighted the language challenge created by the
variation in regional English accents of faculty and the people with whom they interacted. “Not
all of the lecturers are from the U.K. Some were from New Zealand. It’s hard to understand what
they’re saying. When I asked them to repeat what they’re saying, I would still not understand
them” said Kamarul. Another participant, Hani, succinctly described,
My lecturers, some of them they have Scottish accents. And sometimes I didn’t
understand what they were talking about because of their accent. At the end of the
lectures, I had to go back and ask my friends again how we go about doing these and that.
126
As non-native English speakers, participants struggled to understand the different accents and
pronunciations of English that they considered dissimilar to conventional British and American
accents. This problem became a stressor to learning.
One participant accounted that she was treated differently on the basis of her foreign
accent. Idayu found it challenging to adjust to the hospital environment during her first clinical
placement. She indicated that she was perceived as less competent because she did not speak in
an Australian accent,
At some point, I felt I was treated unfairly by my supervisors at Toowoomba (hospital)
because I was a foreign student. The thing about speech pathology is that there are a lot
of communication-based therapy, the way I talk was being observed, the way I present
myself was being observed, my language too, all these things were being judged, it was
really tough. So, I got judged for my accent, and they would comment like, can you speak
in an Australian accent more? Yes, they’d comment that my pronunciation was not right.
Well, I chose to study speech pathology so I can’t be too picky. I felt like that’s my
responsibility to be more adaptable, but sometimes it’s just hard. Like, are you serious?
This is how I speak, how can I change 100% and talk in an Australian accent!
In this regard, it is possible that the hospital had legitimate reasons to require all staff to speak in
an accent that is understood by patients. But, measuring and judging Idayu’s performance based
on her accented English was damaging to her. It affected both her academic success and her
study experience. For a foreign student like Idayu, it is nearly impossible for her to acquire an
Australian-like accent, especially in a brief amount of time.
Dietary needs. As Muslims, all participants follow the Islamic dietary doctrine and
principles of halal food that forbid them from consuming alcohol, pork, blood, and meat of
127
animals that is not slaughtered according to Islamic practices. “Bruneians only eat halal food”
said Yati. Looking for places that sell or serve halal was a non-academic priority for participants
especially during their transition phase. “We had to figure out which halal food, where to get
those,” said Suriani. Participants however, reported that it was relatively easy to find halal food
at their sojourn locations albeit the limited choices available. “B-City has a very large Muslim
population, so (halal) food was easy” said Hafiza. Kamarul frequented halal food places in other
nearby cities to get better food. Kamarul stated, “Availability of halal food was okay, easy to get
but they weren’t really the healthy type so, I had to go to Nottingham or Leicester (nearest cities)
to get more decent food.” None of the participants reported that they consumed non-halal food.
Nadira and Aida’s residence halls did not offer halal food in their menus so both of them
considered the vegetarian and pescatarian options. “They never really had halal food…I became
vegetarian, I’m actually pescatarian” said Nadira.
Participants’ strict adherence to the Islamic food laws had positive and negative
implications on their social interactions on- and off-campus. Nadira shared her experience
establishing positive connections by interacting with other Muslims in New York around food,
I liked hanging out in Brooklyn and it’s actually one of the places that has the most halal
food. I actually had halal jerk chicken there for the first time, they were all Muslims, they
were all wearing tudong (hijab). Outside of classes, I interacted with other cultures
mostly looking for halal food and going around for vegetarian food. Restaurants always
belong to a culture, so then you always learn about their culture. A lot of times, especially
like halal restaurants, it’s always family-owned and they always talk to you.
On the contrary, participants were particularly uncomfortable in social drinking
situations; being around people and friends who were drinking alcohol. Alcohol is prohibited to
128
drink in Islam and none of the participants partook in drinking. Participants viewed this
prohibition as an important symbol of their Malay identity and Islamic beliefs. This created a
cultural barrier between them and their peers. In fact, the drinking culture was most impactful in
affecting the social interactions between participants and domestic students. “I had a difficult
time making friends with the locals. I think culture was a barrier; the drinking culture,” said
Putri. Farhan conveyed,
My closest friends were international students. Not that it was difficult to make friends
with the locals, but rather because of the cultural difference. Like they drink alcohol and
we can’t, which is a big factor. The international students, they don’t really drink that
much.
Participants noted that drinking had a central role in campus socialization and understood that it
was an important part of their new cultural environment. However, unlike many international
students who enjoyed their experiences interacting with the drinking culture, participants were
less excited to break their cultural identity and religious beliefs.
In fact, many participants appeared to be incapable of negotiating the heavy drinking
culture that prevails on and around university campuses in the United States, United Kingdom,
and Australia. As a female, Amirah spoke about being intimidated by excessive drunkenness,
especially when it made her felt at risk of violence or harassment. Amirah succinctly described,
This one time, I went to hang out at their house. I don’t drink you know. So, they were
drinking, and I didn’t know what to do, I wasn’t feeling comfortable. And when they
started getting very drunk, I just got scared, like, I just wanted to go home. They would
ask me to come over again, but I just didn’t want to, after that. I’d always reject their
invitations because I don’t drink, and I’d be feeling intimidated when they get drunk.
129
Female participants were particularly concerned about their safety and tended to avoid drinking
situations due to fear of potential violence and harassment.
Additionally, the legal drinking age in the United Kingdom and Australia is lower
compared to the United States i.e., 18 in the United Kingdom and Australia, versus 21 in the
United States. Because of this, campuses including university residence halls in the United
Kingdom and Australia do not have alcohol-free policies. Participants reported that most of the
activities on campus were centered on alcohol. This excluded them even more because
participants were likely to avoid events or activities that involved alcohol. “After guest lectures,
there are usually (alcoholic) drinks provided and they would chat while everyone drinks. I’d just
go home right after,” said Suriani. “There were (university) activities and gatherings but I’m not
the person who’d go to these types of events. They usually involved drinking and I’m really not
into that,” said Aisha. Participants did not hesitate to say no to events or activities that involved
alcohol.
For participants who studied in the United Kingdom, navigating the British pub culture
was also problematic for them. The pub culture is a significant part of university life in the
United Kingdom. British students go to pubs after classes to wind down, talk about lectures,
work on group projects, or simply socialize. However, participants tended to decline their peers’
invitations to get together or celebrate in pubs which can be viewed as an affront by their British
peers. “They invited me so many times to go out and drink, but I’d always turn them down. I
don’t know what they thought about that, but I think they may have felt displeased that I was
always snubbing them,” said Kamarul. “I’m sure they think that we’re boring because they’d go
for drinks, and we wouldn’t join,” said Suriani. Many international students enjoyed their
130
interactions with British students in pubs, but participants firmly refused to do so. They remained
adamant that there were other ways of developing social connections and friendships.
Other participants spoke about their experiences about the pub and drinking cultures at
their sojourn locations. Norhanim accounted, “They liked to have group work in the pub and that
affected me. I’d say like, oh I can’t come. I’d rather just discuss and contribute online. I’d only
join them if they decided to meet up in uni.” “When we’re done with our group work, they’d be
like, okay let’s celebrate, let’s have a drink. That’s when I told them I would not join them. In
the end, I would always get left out,” said Rahimah. Other participants like Fatimah and Haziq
expressed that participating in campus activities were beneficial for their academic and social
wellbeing. However, they had no doubts about evading events where their peers were likely to
take celebratory drinks. Fatimah described,
The Australian culture, they’re more outgoing, they like to party and stuff. We don’t
really do that in our culture. We’d rather stay in than go out party and get drunk. When I
was part of the Food Science committee, we organized parties. I’d help out with the
preparations and all, but I would tell them I couldn’t come to the party. Because they’d
drink and stuff, so that’s why I didn’t want to come. They would understand and they
were fine.
The same sentiment was illustrated by Haziq,
The other problem was that, yeah we would socialize, we would get closer, but then they
would hang out mostly in bars, which is part of their culture, but for us, we don’t go to
these places, well some people do, but most of us wouldn’t go. Same goes with my
friends in the photography club, we would meet up, do activities together, then when they
wanted to go out for a drink, I would just go home.
131
These participants understood that the drinking culture is an expected and normal part of the
social lives of students in the United States, United Kingdom, and Australia. They, however, had
no desire to partake in this predominant part of their host country culture. As a matter of fact,
nearly all participants noted that the drinking culture in and near campus, and the use of alcohol
for socialization was most problematic for them.
Goal setting. Data revealed that participants were cognizant of their purpose studying
abroad. It was clear that participants were a group of highly goal-oriented individuals who were
driven by academic performance and achievement. Participants’ process of goal setting and
adherence to their goals would later prove to be one of the most important motivational factors
that directly influenced persistence. “I would always remember the reason I was there for, and
that was to study and be successful,” said Hassan. “You’ve got to know what your goal is. At the
end of the day, it’s your future and that is important. Your intentions have got to be right,” said
Amirah. Participants arrived with strong interests for their chosen fields of study and at the same
time had clear goals what they wanted to accomplish. Participants envisioned clear career paths
they wanted to pursue after they graduated and understood that excelling in their studies was
integral in ensuring that they are well equipped for their future endeavors. “I believed that a good
degree would lead to a better job, higher income, basically a better life,” said Haziq. “The faster I
can finish (the program) the sooner I can go to work. Otherwise, jobs will just be taken up by
other people” added Kamarul. No participants considered withdrawing and operationalized
success though their approach to the goal-setting process. Nadira mentioned,
Set out your ultimate goal for what you want to achieve, what would make it most
meaningful for you. And then start to put those pieces together and see how you can
make that. That drove me to succeed and graduate from college.
132
Setting and committing to goals were significant in improving participants’ abilities to adapt to
their new learning cultures and environments and more importantly, were critical in increasing
persistence.
Participants succinctly illustrated that they were high-achievers who were able to stay
focused on specific academic, career, and personal goals that were attainable, relevant, and time-
bounded. For example, Suriani, a First-Class Degree recipient from a university in the United
Kingdom noted,
Most of the time, I was aiming for a First Class (degrees). So, a challenge would be,
when I don’t. I loved my subject, I love literature, I love sociology. I didn’t want to
disappoint my lecturers. Yeah, I didn’t want to disappoint anybody basically. I was
driven by my passion. Especially when I was in the U.K., I was driven by the fact that
I’m representing Brunei and I could be the only Bruneian person they ever met. So, I was
driven by those sort of identity things. I always tried my best.
“My end-goal was to graduate with a First-Class Degree. I managed to achieve that. I was also
aiming to do my professional accounting qualification and I actually did that for another two
semesters at West University in London” said Hassan. Another participant, Aida was focused on
doing well academically and achieve a 4.0 GPA for her program in the United States. She
described,
I would say I did achieve my goals, especially after the first semester, realizing how
damaging it was to skip classes, I really, really tried to, you know, step up my game, go
to classes, actually study. So, I think I exceeded my goals. I’m like, I’m not getting any A
minuses. And just to get like, Latin Honors, sit on stage on graduation; that was really
cool.
133
These examples indicate that participants’ approaches to goal setting allowed them to understand
what they wanted in the first place, which considerably increased their likelihood of success.
Their resoluteness to be successful was evident from their determination and tenacity to keep
pursuing their goals.
Academic adjustment. During their transition phase, participants made adjustments and
learned to operate appropriately in their new academic and social environments. Most
participants found this expected initial adjustment experience to be difficult. “The environment,
everyone there (in Australia) were so competitive and that put a lot of pressure on me. It was
totally different from UTB (Universiti Teknologi Brunei), and that’s the reason why some of us
couldn’t adapt well,” said Haziq. Fatimah stated, “It was too overwhelming, not only I had to
complete assignments, I also had to do research work which I had no background in. I had never
learned how to do that before.” Zaffran and Nadira, also shared some of their experiences
adjusting to their academic environments. Zaffran conveyed,
I remember in my first year, I was really feeling down. It was really bad. I didn’t even go
to classes for like a week or so. I had academic issues, but I think the main contributing
factor was the adapting thing, adapting to the new environment.
The difficulties Zaffran encountered when trying to adapt to his new academic surroundings
seemed to demotivate him. Nadira shared an experience she had during her first few weeks of
classes. She described,
Classes were intense from the first day it started, we already had a lot of assignments in
one week. Within one week I had to finish and design a whole project already. A project
like that in high school, they would give you like a month or half a semester, you know,
to come up with it. I had a week to do it, so I think adjusting to that was difficult.
134
Participants learned to adapt to the academic pressures of higher education and adjusted to new
learning patterns and instructional methodologies of their host institutions. Their academic
adjustment experiences impacted how successfully they transitioned into higher education. The
following paragraphs illustrate how participants utilized personal skills and dispositions to
overcome academic adjustment challenges.
Participants showed respect, openness, flexibility, and adaptability to the host’ academic
cultures. They utilized personal skills and dispositions to negate any challenging academic
adjustments. Participants deployed personal skills like planning ahead, time management,
prioritizing work, managing stress, maintaining work-life balance, resourcefulness, and study
groups. Planning in advance was important for Kamarul, “They tend to stack (assignment)
deadlines closely with each other. That gave me a bit of a headache and I had to plan ahead and
be more organized than I normally would.” Azim learned to manage and prioritize his work, “I
had a huge checklist of the due dates for assignments and quizzes, here and here!” Likewise,
Farhan was involved in a lot of activities outside class and had to make sure that he stayed on
schedule to keep pace with his studies. “I liked to make schedules when I do work. I followed a
strict schedule. For example, I’ll keep a society meeting to 30 minutes so that I can still focus on
my studies.” Hafiza developed time management skills that helped her complete her laboratory
tasks on time, “I learned a lot about managing my time especially when we had lab work because
that took up the whole day from nine to five. I prepped early. That worked out for me” said
Hafiza. Planning ahead and not waiting to the very last minute to start work, managing time, and
prioritizing workload helped participants to manage academic stress.
Like most participants, Suriani and Norhanim understood the value of managing stress
and keeping a work-life balance. “Whenever I get stressed, I’d go out for two hours. I’d go to the
135
park or go window shopping or knock on my friend’s door and talk” said Suriani. Norhanim
advised future Malay students who are considering studying abroad, “Don’t focus only on the
academic stuff. Always take care of your wellbeing, your health. Find a balance between the
two. That was certainly important for me.” Participants also overcame academic challenges by
being resourceful, asking for help from faculty, and seeking advice from classmates. For
example, Kamarul researched for resources, “I didn’t wait for help, I was more proactive. Like in
the library they had all these leaflets on how to do reference, they would have links and I’d
download the documents” said Kamarul. Norhanim sought help from her professor on how to
improve her public speaking skills, “At first, I was shy, and I wasn’t really confident when
talking in public. I took my lecturer’s advice and I joined a one-week course in public speaking.
And after that I joined more courses and workshops.” Finally, Putri spent most of her time
working with her peers and sought their advice. “I spent a lot of time with my classmates. In
design, I couldn’t do everything alone like I had to have a second or third eye on my designs”
said Putri. As pressured and high achieving individuals, participants realized the importance of
maintaining positive mental, emotional, and social wellbeing. They also attributed positive
wellbeing to having a strong social support network that included faculty and peers.
Theme Three: Campus Environments
In the following sections, I will be using Museus’ (2014) Culturally Engaging Campus
Environments (CECE) model to initially guide and frame the findings that significantly impacted
participants’ persistence levels. Seven of nine indicators of Museus’ CECE model emerged as
relevant sub-categories to this study: (1) Cultural familiarity, (2) Culturally validating
environment, (3) Collectivist Cultural Orientation, (4) Humanized educational environments, (5)
Opportunities for meaningful cross-cultural engagement, (6) Proactive philosophies, and (7)
136
Availability of holistic support. Data also revealed that the other two CECE indicators were
relevant to them, yet not at the level to discuss directly for this study. In addition, two other sub-
categories emerged as part of this theme: (1) Multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary approaches
to learning, and (2) Scaffolding academic transition.
Cultural familiarity. Cultural familiarity was a prevalent theme highlighted by
participants. Museus (2014) discussed cultural familiarity as opportunities for students to connect
with faculty, staff, and peers who shared a similar background to their own. As a minoritized
group of students, participants showed a natural affinity for ethnically and religiously alike
individuals on campus. “Going to the U.K, the other side of the world; you suddenly realized that
you’re in a totally new culture. So, yeah, you immediately wanted to find people you’re familiar
with,” said Farhan. “The international students, they get really excited when they meet other
international students who are just closer to home,” Yasmin stated. Farhan added,
I thought even if there were no other people from Brunei, I should be able to adapt as
long there are other Muslims there. I thought maybe I can find somebody from Malaysia
or Indonesia, and that would be fine, and I’d get along. But then, I got close with my two
friends from China. The three of us shared similar cultures and it was easier for us to
connect.
Corresponding to forming social connections during their transition phase, establishing cultural
familiarity on campus was a common requisite for all participants that positively impacted their
persistence levels.
Aida enjoyed interacting with other international students, but expressed how her
experience could be better had there been more students at her university who shared her culture
and identities. She described,
137
I think in my first year, especially, it was easy to feel like I was kind of on my own,
especially because there’s just not many students from Brunei at all. So, for example, like
Koreans, they have a really large community there, even the Chinese students. But
compared to our little Bruneian community of mainly four people, yeah, it's definitely a
different experience. I think what's common among international students is the sense of
community. Especially coming from a different background and people, kind of just
being able to group together based on, you know, their ethnic background. I think that’s
kind of cool, but it didn’t really apply to Bruneians. I think it would have been nice to
have like, a bit more sense of community, because sometimes you do miss home here.
Whereas it’s easier to access you know, like, say for Korean people, there’s Korean food
all around, there’s Korean people all around. It’s not the same for Bruneians. You do
miss the food. And you just want to be with someone who gets it. Someone you can
speak your language with.
Nadira shared similar sentiments,
I think in a way, I was trying to find similarities for something. Like, trying to find a
home in some of it like, what is the closest to it. I feel, us being here in America and you
know, being in New York, they talk about diversity so much, but they lack Southeast
Asian culture. But I had a lot of Muslim friends who were in my school that I was able to
talk about religious things. Like this girl, she's from Malaysia. She would talk a lot about
our religious views and the understanding of it. And then there would be my friends from
Turkey, just to hear all our experiences growing up as Muslims, it was very interesting.
These examples show that participants favored connections with peers who understood them,
particularly those who shared their ethnic and religious identities.
138
Participants were also consistent in discussing how they benefited from interactions with
faculty members who possessed similar cultural backgrounds to their own. Hassan felt more at
ease when he found that one of his professors was originally from Malaysia. Hassan described,
I had one lecturer who taught audit and she’s Malaysian. She’s not Malay-Malaysian but
Indian Malaysian. I only knew she was from Malaysia when one time, she tripped in
class and said ‘alamak’ (Malay expression). That’s when all the Malaysians started
laughing. The minute we knew she was Malaysian it felt more comfortable, easier for us
to engage more. For some reason, it felt easier to talk to her, to consult her about the
module, and ask questions.
Hassan identified and connected better with his Malaysian professor because she resonated the
cultural elements and ways of teaching that appealed to him.
Across the universities that the participants attended, there was no representation of
faculty from the Southeast Asian Malay group. Only one participant mentioned that he had a
Malay tutor but even then, she was not a tenured faculty member. “I had a tutor in my first three
years who was from Brunei. She’s actually a doctor in New Zealand. She was teaching us and at
the same time was taking her medical specialist training there as well,” said Zaffran. In one
instance, Yasmin noticed how the university was making efforts to increase the international
composition of its faculty and staff to attract more international students to enroll. However, she
also felt that this was carried out mainly for the purpose of bringing in more revenue for the
university rather than fostering diversity and multicultural learning environments. “I think at
Starsky uni, they want to increase revenue, they want more international students to come so
they hired a lot of international staff too,” said Yasmin. As reported by Farhan, Zurina, and
Ziana, participants came into contact with ethnically minoritized faculty members who were
139
Asians and Muslims, yet none were recruited from the Southeast Asian Malay ethnic group.
“There were lecturers from Australia and Africa, and Muslims from Pakistan and India, but there
weren’t any from Malaysia or Indonesia,” said Farhan. “All my lecturers and staff were
Australian and White. Only one was Muslim, but she’s from the Middle East,” added Zurina.
Similarly, Ziana stated, “There were no Southeast Asians lecturers. Even the professor that
taught my Southeast Asian module was British. In my department, the lecturers were mostly
male, mostly White.”
Culturally validating environments. Museus (2014) discussed that culturally validating
environments create positive experiences and sense of belonging by validating students’ cultural
backgrounds and identities. Participants conveyed that their universities valued their religious
identity and provided safe spaces for conducting religious activities as well as accommodating
their halal food needs on-campus. “They're very progressive with like a lot of things. The third
year I was there, they built prayer rooms for all the Muslims,” Nadira stated. Another participant,
Farhan, accounted, “We had a small surau (Muslim prayer room) in the library and my classes
were close to the library. They served halal food for Muslims staying in one of the
accommodation halls.” Suria was amazed when she saw Muslim students praying collectively on
campus,
They even had Friday prayers on campus. Yes, there wasn’t a specific building for that,
but they just had it outside on the field. There wasn’t a mosque nearby campus so that’s
why they had Friday prayers on campus. It’s amazing how the university allowed that to
happen, they’re just very open about it, open to different cultures.
140
Such practices of creating campus spaces for prayer rooms and providing halal food on campus
manifested cultural responsiveness of universities in addressing two of the fundamental needs of
their minority Muslim students.
Faculty also played an important role in valuing and validating students cultural and
religious identities. For instance, several participants shared how faculty were considerate of
Muslim students who were fasting during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. Fasting during
Ramadan serves as one of the five pillars of Islam where all adult Muslims except those who are
ill, pregnant or nursing, abstain from eating food or drinking liquid from dawn to sunset. In
Brunei and in many Muslim countries, schools and universities would reduce their operating
hours making it a bit easier for students to perform their fasting duty. Additionally, the dates of
Ramadan follow the Islamic calendar and change every year which also means that in countries
in the northern hemisphere, fasting hours would be shorter in the winter, but can be as long as
twenty hours in the summer. Coming from countries closer to the equator where there are only
small changes in daylight throughout the year, Malay students from Southeast Asia are
accustomed to fasting between 12.5 to 13.5 hours every day. Because of this, they would
normally find it more challenging to fast for longer durations. Norhanim described her
experience,
During my second year, our exams were held during fasting month, during Ramadan. It
was hard for me to study without drinking water for eighteen hours. And it was even
harder for me to take exams during that month. So, I asked my lecturer if I could take my
exams in the evenings and she was okay with that. Yeah, I took my exams alone in her
room after iftar, after I broke my daily fast. When it was time for me to break my fast,
141
she would accompany me to get food, we’d eat together, and then I’d sit for my exam
right there in her office.
Rosma, shared how her university offered flexible exam times for Muslim students during
Ramadan,
My university allowed Muslim students who were fasting to pick alternative slots and
schedule their exams. If you’re fasting, you can fill in a form and request to shift your
afternoon exam to the morning. You know, you’d barely have enough energy left in the
afternoons to do your exams when you’re fasting.
Even though faculty and participants did not share similar beliefs, the positive behaviors of
faculty towards the needs of their Muslim students facilitated the development of a sense of
belonging and created an environment that was respectful and accepting of participants’ faith and
beliefs.
In other instances, participants felt that their cultural and religious identities were
validated by faculty acknowledgement of important cultural events such as the Bruneian
National Day and Islamic religious holidays that are celebrated by Muslims such as Eid Al-Fitr
and Eid Al-Adha. Participants noted they were allowed to be absent from classes to attend these
cultural and religious celebrations provided that they had the relevant support letters. Nadira
accounted,
They were very inclusive of a lot of different cultures. And, the only days I was allowed
to skip classes was if had an official reason like National Day. I would have to prove to
them and then, if it was a cultural thing, they would be very understanding about it. So,
that was a really good thing about my school and that's what I really liked about my
school.
142
Yasmin shared a similar circumstance,
I know the university is flexible with religious events. You can go away to attend your
religious events. But, for me, I was not keen on skipping classes to attend religious
celebrations. For you to be allowed leave, you’d have to get a letter from your religious
leader first.
Faculty acknowledgement of participants’ cultural events and religious holidays conveyed a
message to students that their culture, faith, and beliefs were appreciated. The options they
presented to students created positive campus climates that placed a high value on respect for
diversity.
Suria wears modest clothing that reflect her Malay-Muslim identity and distinguishes her
from Chinese and non-Malay Bruneians. Wearing head coverings is not compulsory for Muslim
women in Brunei, Malaysia, and Indonesia, but many opt to conceal their hair and cover
themselves from the neck to ankles as one of the ways to conform to the teachings of Islam. In
her physiotherapy program in Australia, students were required to wear clothing that allowed
trainers and peers to see the skin, joints, and muscles during practical classes. Suria did not want
to break her religious values and described how the university validated her identity and made its
learning environment inclusive,
The good thing about the university is that they’re really open to other cultures, they’re
accepting of people of different cultures. I remember my first few weeks of classes when
I had to sort out my practical classes. In physiotherapy, we’re mostly hands on. Our
practical lab was not like the typical science lab. Our lab consisted of beds, and we would
practice physiotherapy in partners. During our practical classes, you actually had to wear
skin exposing attire so other people can examine you, and practice physio skills on you.
143
We would examine each other’s bones, muscles and joints for injury. Because I’m a
Muslim, I was not ready to expose parts of my body openly and I was definitely not
comfortable with another male student touching my muscles and joints. So yeah, I talked
to them and they allowed me to take up one corner of the room. They covered that corner
so nobody would see me without my full clothes on and they also made sure that I got
partnered with a female student. That was how I worked in my practical classes
throughout my whole 4 years there. There were only like three Muslims in our class of
100 people, but they treated us equally.
Suria brought attention to her religious concerns and her university was able to better
accommodate her values and created a learning environment that was inclusive to racial minority
students.
Administrators and educators communicated effectively to participants that their cultural
identities were valued at their universities. “Every semester, the Dean would send a message
welcoming all students back. He’d say a few words about culture too, raising awareness about
the different cultures present on campus,’’ said Zurina. “They put up a banner to wish Happy Eid
to all Muslims on campus. That year we didn’t get to go home for Eid Al-Fitr, and we took
pictures with the banner and showed them to our families back home!” said Norhanim. At the
time when Zaffran was having serious psychological distress, he realized that his school
appreciated him rather more by being responsive of his Malay cultural background. He shared,
That same afternoon, I got a phone call from my tutor telling me that the Dean was
waiting for me at medical school. After hearing my problems, the Dean suggested that it
would be good for me to talk to the school’s psychologist. She gave me two options; one
was to see a local psychologist, and second was to see another psychologist who was
144
originally from Malaysia. Coming from a similar cultural background, she thought that it
would be more helpful for me to talk to the Malaysian psychologist.
Validating students’ cultural identities enable college administrators and educators to develop
and earn trust that led to increased students’ persistence and success.
Collectivist cultural orientations. This sub-category describes institutional efforts to
engage students with a more collectivist, rather than individualistic, orientated experience
(Museus, 2014). In contrast to their collectivist culture at home, participants noted that their host
campuses tended to be more individualistic where less emphasis was placed on the group. Adept
students were seen as being independent, competitive, and self-reliant. “Compared to Brunei,
which is the more collectivist culture, definitely the individualistic culture shines more in the
U.S.,” said Aida. This comparison was also confirmed by participants who studied in the United
Kingdom and Australia. “They’re very career-driven, very competitive, and more
individualistic,” said Hassan. “They’re very individualistic, some, but not all of them. I could see
sometimes that they do not like to help each other with coursework,” said Fatimah.
Consequently, participants indicated that they enjoyed working collectively as a group
and appreciated the opportunities to cooperate socially with other students in team-based
projects. Farhan stated that he was always looking forward to group work, “We had a lot of
group assignments and the lecturer would group us randomly, so I had to pair up with different
people. I always liked that.” Another participant, Johana, shared that she particularly liked
sharing ideas with her group members and having a sense of personal accountability for the good
of the group, “I liked exchanging ideas with other people and being able to complete my
assigned tasks for the group. My group members were very supportive, and I felt comfortable
working with them.” Participants valued working in groups. Group work presented participants
145
with a group-learning process that allowed them to collaborate with peers both inside- and
outside-of their classrooms. Working cooperatively seemed to be more impactful in establishing
a social cohesive learning environment compared to small-group discussions in class.
The deliberate grouping of students to maximize interactions and learning amongst
students of different racial and ethnic backgrounds had positive impacts on participants. For
Laila and Yasmin, group work helped them to fit in better with their local friends. “I actually
liked it when our groups were assigned randomly because I got to work with the Australian
students. And they’re always friendly,” said Laila. Yasmin shared that group work allowed her to
foster friendships with local students,
When I started the social work part of the program, I literally knew no one. I felt lonely
and missed my health science friends. It felt like I was coming to class just for the sake of
going to class. But then all the group work we had, the constant group discussions, that
allowed me to make new local friends.
Aida also described that collaborating in groups enabled her to connect with her peers from
different backgrounds,
During freshman year, they have this college cohort program where they break down the
incoming undergraduate class into like smaller groups, maybe 20 kids. And yeah, there,
you really get to build connections with people from all different backgrounds. Just kind
of find your place within this new group of people.
Nadira spoke how intentional groupings led to better social learning environments in her classes,
In our classes, whenever we had group work, in general, they would always mix it up.
That's why we always had like one Chinese girl who couldn’t speak English and stuff like
that. Our teachers would intentionally break up all the segregation and mix us up.
146
Because our school always said like you're going to be working with the world, you
might have a client in China, you might have a client in Australia, you're not going to
work with people you like all the time or people that you get along with all the time. So
yes, we had to learn to work with everybody.
Working collaboratively in groups as a team created a more collectivist learning experience for
participants, facilitated community building, fostered friendships, and was instrumental in
providing a cohesive social learning environment.
Humanized educational environments. Museus’ CECE model suggested that
institutions that are committed to developing meaningful relationships with students will
cultivate positive students’ outcomes (Museus, 2014). Several participants described the crucial
roles campus agents had on their persistence and ultimate success. The meaningful relationships
they had with faculty and staff were integral in helping them overcome serious persistence
challenges. “I think part of reason why I persisted until graduation was having a really supportive
university, the other reason was my passion for medicine,” said Zaffran.
Zaffran specifically explained that it would have not been possible for him to graduate
from medical school without the care and support he received from the Dean, faculty, and staff
of the medical school. Zaffran shared his story grappling with clinical depression during his
second year of medical school. He described,
That day, when I had that breakdown in front of my tutor, it was already 6 P.M. and the
school was closed. But I still remember that the Dean of Medical School was willing to
wait for me that same evening to personally talk to me. I was later diagnosed with general
anxiety disorder. That was a really bad time for me. I was put on medication for a year
and had to undergo a cognitive behavior treatment until I got better. Throughout that
147
period, the Dean saw me at least once every month, to see how I was progressing. I’m not
sure how I would be if I didn’t get that kind of help and support. Back then I was
definitely thinking about quitting especially during that one week when I didn’t even feel
like waking up.
Zaffran explained that the Dean and faculty members were always ready to provide academic
and emotional support to their students,
The Dean held meetings with us, he invited all the international students and faculty
members to his home. He asked us what our problems were and sought feedback to
improve our medical school. He also asked us if we liked to see any changes in the way
they were doing things. He understood the challenges we were facing especially the
cultural barriers, the cultural challenges, the language barrier. He was really serious about
making our living and learning experiences better. Other faculty were ready to listen and
were really helpful too. We considered them as family.
Zaffran added,
Then there’s this lady in school who took really good care of us. We called her our big
mama, yeah, big mama of medical school. After class, I would go and talk to her, and
people would hang around her too. She was such a nice and caring person.
The Dean and faculty members appreciated the powerful influence that positive relationships
with students have on students’ sense of belonging to the medical school. They leveraged strong
and meaningful relationships with students, functioned as an active part of students’ lives, and
were devoted to ensuring students’ success.
When asked what had been positive at her institution, Idayu shared that the immense
supportive relationship she had with Lucy, the clinical liaison officer at her institution, had been
148
the most positive and most helpful. “I went through a really tough time during my clinical
placement, but the support system was amazing, really great. What Lucy did for me was most
helpful,” said Idayu. She was struggling to cope with the challenges she was encountering during
the clinical placement part of her program. Idayu felt that she was consistently being graded
unfairly by her clinical supervisors at the hospital where she undertook her work placement.
Idayu described the support Lucy gave her,
Lucy was my savior. Lucy would call me every three days. She would check in, she’d ask
me what I did that day, did I set my goals. She came to visit me at the hospital twice, to
see me and to talk to my supervisors. She told me not to give up, she gave me strategies,
she was really helpful and helped me cleared my mind. And she let me cry in front of her
too.
Idayu continued,
The day when they failed me, Lucy came in to visit me again at the hospital. She looked
at my grades and cried with me too. So, I told her, since I had failed anyway, I requested
if I could go home early, that was the last week already, and I told her I was emotionally
and physically tired. I went into a slump then, I disappeared for a few days. After that
experience, Lucy took care of me, she would check in with me from time to time. What I
heard after that, was she had brought my case to the university and in one of their
meetings, the university unanimously agreed to give me an extended placement
somewhere else, which was rare.
Nadira accounted the connection she developed with one of her teachers,
The one teacher I was most afraid of and I’d always just start crying when I presented to
him, he ended up being one of my most memorable teachers. There’s this one time, we
149
all left our work overnight and then people like to sabotage. People are just too
competitive. I don't know what happened to my project, but it was thrown out and I
couldn't find it anywhere. And so, my teacher, outside our department, on the street, you
know, those really big dumpsters that’s the size of this room, he got a ladder and he
climbed in there with me and we looked for my project. And we found it! So that was one
good thing that he did for me. And he was the Dean actually, of my program. I chose him
as my teacher because I thought I really wanted to grow, but that's why I was so scared of
him because he's a really notable designer and he was like the Dean of the program. And
then he ended up being one who helped me the most, through everything especially at my
hardest time.
The ongoing commitments and interventions of faculty and staff in developing meaningful
relationships with students and creating humanized educational environments contributed greatly
to participants’ success especially for those participants who were at risk of dropping out.
Opportunities for meaningful cross-cultural engagement. The CECE model posited
that institutions produce positive outcomes by providing the means for students to have positive
and intentional interactions with students from different cultures. Data from this study indicated
that higher education institutions in the United Kingdom, Australia, the United States, and New
Zealand utilized different approaches that aimed to involve students’ cross-cultural engagement.
In one institution in the United States, Nadira described that critical dialogue and cross-cultural
conversations took place in one of her classes,
In my politics class, we always talked about different cultures, and opinions would
always be phrased from our culture. Because we are taught to be, to answer something
holistically, or to ask something the proper way, or the most politically correct way, to
150
phrase it from your perspective, and you have to give a background to that. So, we will
always talk about our culture like as a Brunei Malay person who grew up in this kind of
culture.
Encouraging educational cross-cultural conversations in a safe classroom setting allowed
students to explore and understand the different viewpoints of students from different countries,
cultures, and backgrounds.
In the United Kingdom, most participants noted that their institutions embraced cultural
diversity by utilizing their resources on campus for extra-curricular activities and events where
various students’ associations showcased and celebrated their unique cultures. Dewi described
participating in an annual cultural event held by her university,
We had what we called World Fest. Basically, societies and clubs can participate and we,
the BruKent society, the Bruneians, we took part every year in cultural performances. We
went all out. And we always win either first or second or third place every year.
Another participant, Norhanim noted that the Brunei Students’ Society received favorable
support from her university to organize their Give-it-a-Go event every year. She said,
We had this Give-it-a-Go activity for three days. We booked a room and showcased our
culture. We would cook nasi katok or kek batik. People can pay one pound to enter the
room and they can try our food, take pictures, try our head scarf, sinjang (male Malay
attire). That’s how we showcased Brunei to people on campus.
These activities were mostly student-led that included cultural shows, international days,
exhibitions, and societies’ gatherings.
A few institutions held inter-society and inter-faith roundtable discussions to enhance
understanding of the diverse views and perspectives of different student groups on campus.
151
Kamarul described participating in a discussion aimed at overcoming prejudice and
misunderstanding between the different religious groups present on campus. He accounted,
The university have this health and spirituality center and in one round table discussion,
people from different beliefs sat down and talked about their own. I joined that
voluntarily. The discussion was fun, we exchanged experiences. The aim was to
encourage harmony among students of different beliefs.
In another example, Rosma spoke about the opportunity given to create partnerships and
relationships with other students’ societies,
We had this event, part of the Student Union, where we sat down together and get to
know people from other societies. Two representatives would come from each society
and everyone were introduced to the representative of other societies like the Russian
society, and we got to talk to them. We shared our ideas and all
Cross-cultural discussions and dialogues promoted meaningful interactions between different
student groups on campus.
Volunteering also facilitated cross-cultural interactions. Joining the International society,
Women’s society, and the Islamic society on campus allowed Amirah to participate in various
volunteer efforts. Amirah described,
I joined the international society and participated in their events. And I spent a lot of time
with the Women’s and Islamic societies, too. I joined these societies not simply because I
wanted to learn or talk about Islam for example. I was more interested in joining their
charity work. We got to work closely with the local community, we volunteered to clean
up old folks’ places, those kinds of things.
152
Cross-cultural events, societies’ activities, and impromptu volunteering offered international
students opportunities to share their ideas, values, and cultural experiences with their
surrounding communities. These cross-cultural engagement opportunities promoted learning
environments that encouraged deeper understanding between host country students and
international students.
Several participants who studied in Australia described that they would like to see similar
initiatives that foster meaningful interactions for diverse student groups present on campus.
Comparing her experiences enrolling in a degree program in the United Kingdom and Australia,
Sofia noted,
In the U.K., I was more involved with the Brunei students’ society. It was more serious
there, but it wasn’t like that in Australia. I felt like we could have done more culturally
in uni (in Australia) other than going to lectures.
Yasmin shared that she would have liked to have the same cultural interactions and experiences
her friends in the United Kingdom had. She felt that such activities would contribute to positive
interactions and inclusion,
We didn’t have cultural nights or events like they have in U.K. universities. I know this
because I saw my friends in the U.K. getting all dressed up in their traditional attires,
showcasing our culture to other people. We didn’t have those kinds of events in
Melbourne. It would have been good if we did, we would have participated, and I think
that would have made us felt less isolated.
One participant, Zurina, shared that she looked for courses outside her program to have more
positive interactions with students from other cultures,
153
We had opportunities to learn about each other’s cultures, but never formally in class. In
class, we only talked casually about our different cultures. One day, I decided to attend a
language exchange class where I got assigned a partner from Korea. The Korean girl
taught me Korean and I taught her Malay. This wasn’t part of my program and anyone
was welcome to join. Later on, I even took Korean as my elective. I can speak some
Korean now. Because of that I made a lot of Korean friends in Australia.
In certain programs, participants enrolled in specific courses where they learned intercultural
competencies and cross-communication skills. For example, Idayu took a course on Australian
aboriginal culture. She shared her experience,
We learned so much about the aboriginal community. You’d need to have a real
understanding of their community if you want to work with them, there are special
medical centers for them. So yes, I learned how to communicate appropriately with the
aborigines, how to approach the indigenous people the proper way.
Similarly, Zaffran described that his institution placed strong emphases on cultural
competencies,
In our course, we had cultural modules, we learned a lot about the Maori culture. We
were taught the importance of respecting the Maori culture and other cultures as well. We
would be examined specifically on our cultural competencies and how we interacted with
patients culturally. They were very particular about that. There was a really strong
emphasis on cultural learning in Otago, in New Zealand. For example, they have these
sacred cultural buildings called Maraes in New Zealand where they usually hold cultural
events like weddings. We had to spend two nights in a Marae, as part of our module. It
was a requirement to pass that module.
154
Additionally, Zaffran talked about his university’s International Friendship Network program
that was designed to promote cross-cultural interactions and especially, to connect both
international and domestic students to local and international cultures. Zaffran described,
We, the international students, we had this buddy system under OIFN (Otago’s
International Friendship Network program). Every international student in medical school
can have a buddy who is a local. I was in the buddy system for two years. Participation
was voluntary, so if you do not want to be enrolled in the system you can just opt out. My
buddy, he helped me with my writing, and he was from medical school, too. We were in
the same year and same class. We met once a week but that’s not compulsory, if we
wanted to meet then we’d meet. For some of us, this system didn’t work that well but for
me it did. Depends on the buddy, I guess. So, I was lucky to be assigned a helpful buddy.
And this buddy I had, he was the president of one of the medical school association, so he
was very much into it, to help students.
Cross-cultural engagement matters to participants. In-class dialogues about culture, extra-
curricular cultural events, and other intentionally designed intercultural programs such as East
University’s buddy system, enabled institutions to counteract cultural misunderstandings
between diverse racial groups, foster intercultural friendships, and promote cross-racial
interactions on campus.
Proactive philosophies. The CECE model (2014) encouraged faculty and staff to
proactively provide resources and information to students from diverse racial and ethnic groups.
“The school’s psychologist was excellent. She knew all the support services that were available
to help me,” said Zaffran. Several participants shared positive experiences when faculty and staff
went beyond just providing information they needed and made extra efforts to make sure
155
participants received befitting support. Zaffran continued and stated, “They made the referral
appointment…They did all for me. They even asked me if I wanted to see the psychologist with
them, with any one of them.” Another participant, Haziq, accounted that he received emails from
his university every semester informing students about the different types of services that were
available on campus and the relevant student affairs personnel to look for should they need help.
“That’s something we don’t have here. That was really helpful. Even though I never got to use
these services, it was very assuring that I would be able to access them if I ever had personal or
academic problems,” said Haziq. He added, “I felt assured that they’d have someone that would
be able to counsel me, advise me. Having those options available for me, knowing that I could
always talk to them if I need to, took some pressure off me.”
Additionally, participants illustrated proactive actions of faculty and staff that helped to
increase students’ likelihood of achieving success. For example, Nadira shared how her
professors sought alternative locations at other schools in New York City and continued
conducting classes when all her department’s art and design equipment were damaged by flood
water. “For a whole year we had nothing to work with. But there were a few teachers that taught
at other good design schools…they would bring us to their schools, use their design rooms and
stuff.” In another instance, Norhanim expressed how fortunate she was to have a tutor who was
willing to conduct make-up classes for all the classes she missed due to illness. She accounted,
When I got well, I had to consult my tutor and asked him how I can gain back the lectures
that I missed. He talked to the lecturers and got all the handouts for me. He even taught
me all the parts that I missed, one-on-one for the next two weeks. He arranged time so he
could teach all the three modules I missed. That was so very helpful for me.
156
The importance of proactively sharing information and making extra efforts to provide students
with befitting resources and support should not be underestimated. These actions and practices
helped to increase students’ persistence and maximize their likelihood of graduating.
Availability of holistic support. The CECE model (2014) postulated that the
accessibility of holistic support for students i.e., providing students access to at least one faculty
or staff member who can provide them with information, help, or connect them to support, would
increase the success rates of students from ethnic-minority groups. Twelve participants i.e., nine
graduates from the United Kingdom, one from Australia, and one from New Zealand mentioned
that they were allocated a Personal Tutor i.e., a faculty member, who provided academic
guidance and support to help them progress through their academic years. A personal tutor
served as a point of contact and a focal point of information for students. Because of this,
personal tutors played a key role in participants’ relationships with their institution. “Every year
we were assigned a personal tutor who you can to talk to about any of your problems,” said
Hafiza, “We had meetings with our tutor to check our academic progress, every semester,” said
Rosma.
Some of the participants expressed that positive relationships with their personal tutors
helped them thrive and succeed. For example, Kamarul accounted that he was fortunate to have a
caring and supportive personal tutor, “My personal tutor was very good. Yeah, we had a really
good student-tutor relationship from my first day until my third year when I graduated.” Amirah
reached out to her personal tutor when she had an unanticipated panic attack, “Suddenly I felt my
room was like, filled with smoke. That was so bad. So, I emailed my personal tutor and she told
me to go to our mental health center on campus.” Hassan described that his personal tutor was
willing to listen to his academic difficulties. “I talked to my personal tutor about my academic
157
problems. He was always ready to listen. Then, he’d try to gather feedbacks from other students
if he thinks that other students were affected by the same problems,” said Hassan.
On the other hand, some participants accounted that they were less active in seeking
guidance and support from their personal tutors. One participant, Azim, felt that his personal
tutor offered him little academic support. “He wasn’t able to help me with the modules because
he wasn’t involved in teaching any of the modules that I had. I didn’t really know anyone else to
approach so, that was stressful,” said Azim. Similarly, another participant, Dewi, described her
relationship with her personal tutor, “I had a personal tutor, but I didn’t see him much. He wasn’t
our lecturer, never taught me even once during the whole three years. So, I wasn’t sure how he
could help me.” In another instance, Yati found her personal tutor unapproachable and
intimidating,
In my second year, I failed an elective module. So, I went to consult my personal tutor to
ask him what I needed to do. Instead, he started questioning me like, “Why didn’t you
seek help from the start?” I felt like he sort of got angry at me which made me felt down.
He could have been more constructive with his advices. So, I told myself I wouldn’t want
to see him again.
Some participants found that interactions with personal tutors can be too much or subduing for
them which made it difficult for students to build rapport with their tutors.
Data revealed that effective personal tutors were valuable assets that helped and guided
participants towards success. They created a learning environment in which participants
flourished academically and helped them reflect on their academic progress. Participants sought
support and guidance from their personal tutors. Having a positive student-personal tutor
relationship resulted in constant communication between participants and their personal tutors.
158
Consequently, the personal tutor often became the first person on campus to hear about
participants’ academic and personal difficulties.
Multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary approaches to learning. Two participants who
graduated from the United States had the opportunity to experience multidisciplinary learning
i.e., taking breadth subjects outside of their departments. Nadira expressed her satisfaction at
being able to draw on knowledge from other disciplines,
They had a lot of really interesting classes. Yeah, I think being able to, like the course
choices, it's not so rigid. Besides your core classes, your core credits, like the studio and
everything you need to take, you can always take more outside of that, up to 23 credits
per semester. And I would always be around 19 to 20 credits just because I wanted to
learn. Being able to do that, like social studies with product design, who would have
thought. And social studies was not even under my school division. It was under another
division called LANG.
Nadira continued,
And there’s varieties, like, there's playground, fashion design, there’s product design,
there’s photography, there's so many different, there’s African art history, it’s very
specific or like LGBT history. That's how vast it is, you can literally take anything. You
know learning all this, and I'm like, this is really cool. I don't know if I could do this in
any other university, I think. They allowed me to take it and it counted towards credits.
Aida, a psychology graduate, accounted similar sentiments. She preferred the flexibility of the
U.S. curriculum that allowed her to learn about different cultures and contexts,
The U.S. system of education, it’s very different. I took piano lessons, as part like, as a
course in college. I even took music therapy. Sometimes you end up studying things that
159
you never thought that you would learn about. For example, I took a class on the
Caribbean like all these Caribbean history. I think it's pretty cool to be able to learn all
these different things and work with other people who are not necessarily in your major.
Yeah, I just preferred the flexibility of U.S. curriculum, I guess.
Relatedly, some participants who graduated from institutions in the United Kingdom and
Australia indicated that they would have liked to see greater flexibility, more integration of
optional subjects, and availability of interdisciplinary programs that will help them achieve both
the required depth and breadth in knowledge. “I didn’t just want to study literature. I wanted to
study literature with something, like with Psychology. But I couldn’t find any university that
offered joint honors. It was always like just English,” said Suriani. Dewi described, “During my
second year, we didn’t have optional modules. It was the same for everyone…it was the worst
for me. I didn’t like some of the modules they offered, but I had no choice but to take them all.”
Sofia shared a similar sentiment, “Sometimes when you don’t like something and you still have
to take it, your brain just can’t process it all…At other unis, you have more choices, you don’t
have to take all the statistics modules.”
Participants indicated that they wanted to take charge of their academic programs. For
instance, Rahimah accounted,
Some of the modules were less related to our contexts, but they made them
compulsory for us, international students, to take. We argued and we asked our student
representative to appeal for our case. In the end, they made these modules optional.
Thus, participants realized the importance of maintaining their disciplinary roles and deepening
their knowledge of specializations. However, they also understood that a lot of questions or
complex problems can be better addressed by utilizing complementary knowledge that are
160
gained or integrated from other disciplines. “Try to have modules that are from the voices of
people like me. That would be it,” Suriani suggested.
Scaffolding academic transition. Arriving with different educational experiences and
coming from diverse social and cultural backgrounds, participants argued that they required
more time to learn perquisite tasks, skills, and concepts to facilitate smooth transitions into their
academic programs. They talked about a scaffolded learning environment that purposely
supported the learning of new skills and knowledge through progressive scaffolds that would
allow them to utilize their preferred learning styles. In one example, Laila was enrolled in a
twinning program where she had to take two years of classes in Brunei before transferring to an
Australian institution. She struggled to complete a computer modelling project because no
instructional scaffolding was carried out for newly arrived Bruneian students,
In one project, we had to design a model reservoir and run it in a computer simulation.
That simulation program is called Petrel. We were lost. Everyone else in the class knew
what Petrel was. But for us (Brunei students), we had never heard about it. I think they
(local students) learned how to use it during their first and second years. We were never
taught how to use Petrel in Brunei. So, somehow, we had to teach ourselves to use the
software, and we had to ask around. Yes, we were given instructions, to do this and that,
but that’s all. We didn’t even know how or where to start.
Similarly, Dewi stated, “I was already doing research in my first year and that was a shock for
me. It was mostly quantitative research and we weren’t exactly told what to do, what to include,
what type of journals to look for.” Another participant, Fatimah, described her difficulties
transitioning into her Biology program. Fatimah accounted,
161
For this one biology course, we were given assignments every week. That was too much
and it was during my first year too. I wasn’t used to that yet. It was totally new to me
which quickly overwhelmed me. Not only I had to do the assignments, I also had to do
some research work, which I had no background in, or had never learned how to do
before that. We had to ask questions to another group and the questions had to be very
specific. We couldn’t ask simple questions, we had to make sure that we asked difficult
questions. I thought that was unfair to expect from new students.
Sofia contrasted her learning experiences in the United Kingdom and Australia. She described
that her institution in Australia provided a more supportive learning environment,
In the United Kingdom, I’d tell you again, for my first year, they just threw all these
modules at you. It was so hard even in the beginning. Like, I didn’t even know what I
was supposed to be doing. But in Australia, they gave us more time. For my first year, I
just had to do the basic math courses first. They’re university math but the math was
more foundational, the basic stuff. They didn’t go straight to pure, advanced math. Then
in the second year, it got interesting, it got more serious and more in depth. Because they
started slow, it made me happier and less stressed. But when I was in Warrick, we had to
do the hard stuff right away.
Sofia continued,
In the U.K., my first year was really heavy. There were too many modules in the first
year! For each semester, I had to do seven modules. That’s way too much, and for ten
weeks! I can tell you the difference now. For ten weeks, I had to do seven modules
(United Kingdom) but in Australia, I had 14 weeks in the semester and I only had to do 4
modules. And also, I still remember that during that first year in Australia, the content
162
was doable, math that you can do. Then, in the second year it got different and we started
to learn all the difficult stuff. The fact that they didn’t start with the hard modules early
on, gave me the opportunity to get used to the uni first.
These participants would have benefited from more engaging and meaningful learning
environments in which purposeful academic scaffoldings were used. For international students
who come from ethnically diverse backgrounds, this would also provide a learning environment
that is welcoming and caring that takes into account their cultural backgrounds as well as the
differences in educational experiences they have had. A scaffolded learning environment that
considers additional time and effort for diverse international student populations to comprehend
Western-style learning skills and study approaches, would significantly develop their confidence
and allow them to be in charge of their own collegial success.
Theme Four: Clinical Placement and Internship Environments
A portion of the participants were enrolled in health professional programs such as health
science and social work, medicine, physiotherapy, and speech pathology. These participants
undertook clinical placements that involved supervised practice in approved hospitals, clinics,
community health centers, and specialist healthcare areas. Clinical placements were compulsory,
and participants had to complete a set minimum of hours of placements throughout their
programs, including placements in their first years. Only one other participant noted that she
undertook an internship as part of her art and design degree program in the United States.
Participants mentioned that clinical placements and internships were central to their
undergraduate programs. They learned relevant skills outside of the classroom, in a clinical or
business setting. Additionally, placements and internships presented opportunities to put theory
into practice. Suria illustrated the importance of placements and internships,
163
We need work placements. The real-world work experience is so valuable. I believe work
placements are very important because they allow you to develop new skills and
knowledge. And you want to be able to apply all the theories you have learned in class
into real-world practice.
Nadira interned in a design company in the United States as an art and design student. She
described her overall internship experience as positive, enriching, and helped her in making
career decisions. Nadira accounted,
It’s a requirement to intern, part of my program, for a semester or a certain amount of
hours. But I interned for the company for three years and ended up working with them
full-time in the last year after I graduated. They really wanted to keep me on, but then I
had obligations to come back (to Brunei). That’s why I quit the company. I think that was
a really positive experience because that kind of experience leads into all kinds of
workplace. You can use that experience in any part of your life. I worked with Vogue and
I worked with Bloomingdales. I did setups for them. Learning all that from them and then
coming back to Brunei and seeing like, even though I love my dad and my sister, and
they’re doing a great job with the gallery, I’ve seen so much better. And I’ve seen how it
can be improved.
In addition to learning new career skills and knowledge, clinical placements and internships
allowed students to learn about professionalism, make decisions about their careers, and put
theory into practice.
Burnout and mental exhaustion. However, unlike Nadira, most participants described
their clinical placement experiences as exceptionally challenging. “Placement was the best time,
but it also gave me some of the worst struggles,” said Suria, who undertook physiotherapy
164
placements in Australia. “I struggled a lot. It was mentally draining for me,” said Idayu, a speech
therapy graduate. Participants indicated experiencing fatigue and burnout from physical, mental,
and emotional stress. As a new student, Amirah had to complete a minimum of fourteen weeks
of clinical placement that was spread throughout her first and second years before undertaking a
final block towards the end of her third year. Amirah conveyed, “I was getting tired and tired,
more and more demotivated. We were getting less breaks because we had placements every
semester, from the first year (until the third year).” At the same, Amirah was also subjected to an
extensive assessment system that included written assignments, written examinations, reflective
assignments, oral presentations, practical examinations, and clinical assessments. Amirah
described being overwhelmed by the rigor of her physiotherapy program,
We always had placements first and then after that, we would have our exams. At one
time, I was expecting that I was going to fail half of my exams! At that point, I didn’t
think I was going to be able to keep doing it for the next two years, until my third year.
Struggling to manage her stress levels, Amirah would fail her second-year placement and was at
risk of being dismissed by her university. As a result, she had to make evident progress in her
forthcoming exams and was asked to repeat her clinical placement. Amirah accounted,
After failing the placement, I had like eight/nine days break before I had to sit for my
exams. That was when my motivation went up. I gave my absolute everything during that
break. And the good thing was I passed all the exams and I even got two distinctions. My
personal tutor was happy again. But that also meant that I had to go home (to Brunei) late
that summer because I had to redo my (failed) placement. That was really exhausting for
me.
The relentless pressure to successfully complete clinical placements while maintaining high
165
academic standing, combined with a compact and rigorous program structure, often caused
participants to suffer from fatigue and burnout, which negatively impacted their persistence
levels.
Suria, conveyed similar sentiments. “There were times when I had meltdowns in the
middle of placement,” said Suria. She described her typical daily routine during a semester that
involved clinical placement,
Work started from 8 a.m. so, I would leave home at 7 a.m. because my placement was
about an hour away from the city. I’d return late in the evening after five. And then at
night, I’d have more work to do. I had to work on my research, and I had to prepare for
my patients for the next day. It was like that every day for the whole year. I had three
blocks of placements. The first two blocks were five weeks each with a break in-between,
and then we went on for another block of another ten weeks.
When asked what caused her meltdowns, Suria replied,
Everything. The commuting. Time (management). Lack of knowledge and skills. I had to
study study study, while working. And the emotional battles, too. Struggling against the
feelings of incompetence, that was my main challenge. Not feeling sure whether I’m
going to get through clinical placement, those kinds of things.
Similarly, Idayu indicated that her lack of experience, skills, and knowledge affected her ability
to function well in her clinical environment,
It was my first hospital placement, my first adult placement in a rehab setting working
with patients who had stroke and other people with severe cases. I was trying to learn but
I had no experience, my learning growth was slow.
166
Clinical placements also brought in high patient care workloads. The examples above represent a
key challenge for participants i.e., managing the demands and time pressures of both academics
and clinical practicing. On top of that, most participants felt that they came into their clinical
environments with low level of proficiencies; lacking skills that are both general to healthcare
and specific to their specialist areas.
Participants suffering from burnout, fatigue, and stress were also more likely to suffer
from mental illness such as anxiety and depression. “One of my closest friends got really
depressed too. She had a panic attack and she cried in front of her supervisor during her
placement in hospital. I think she was referred to the same psychologist that I saw,” said Zaffran,
who graduated from medical school. Amirah accounted how a mixture of stress, fatigue, and fear
of being dismissed by her university triggered an anxiety attack,
That second year, after I failed my placement, I gave my everything to pass my exams. I
became very anxious because I knew I cannot afford to fail any more exams. That week, I
had a terrible anxiety attack. I was really surprised because I never had mental health
problems before.
Amirah continued, “It’s not only me, most people in my program were really stressed, too. She
explained why she failed her placement,
It was really bad, and I was so stressed. It’s hard to explain. I was placed in an ICU ward
and because I was a student, I had to be supervised the whole time. But this one time,
there was this kid, she’s autistic, and she kept screaming at me to inject her. Actually,
when that happened, I already had the syringe in my hand. That was a safety fail. I wasn’t
going to inject her because I knew that I still had to wait for my supervisor. It was a
167
reflex action and I just grabbed the syringe with my hand. Just because of that incident, I
was failed. I was really disappointed when they failed me.
Participants became overwhelmed with new tasks and pressures at work. Consequently, they
became more prone to stress, fatigue, and burnout which affected their ability to carry-out safe
and competent practices that are critical in healthcare.
Quality of supervisory relationship. During clinical placements, participants were
supervised and assessed by qualified clinicians, and supported by an on-campus faculty member.
The quality of the student-supervisor relationship played a significant role in influencing the
development of positive learning environments during placements. “If you’re lucky, you will
have a supervisor who can guide you and who will accept your mistakes as part of your learning
process,” said Suria. She added that communication is crucial for a successful supervisory
relationship. Throughout her placement, Suria would consult her supervisor when problems or
issues arose. Suria stated,
Basically, communication is key. If you have issues (about work), you talk about it, you
don’t play them down. During placements, you would talk to your supervisor over every
issue or concern. My supervisor would tell me, if there were any methods that I didn’t
like, or if I preferred using a different method, I should always let her know.
Suria enjoyed a positive and supportive supervisory relationship at her clinical workplace which
helped her to successfully develop professional competencies under the supervision of her
clinical supervisor.
On the contrary, Idayu conveyed that she had a difficult relationship with both of her
placement supervisors. “Me and my supervisor didn’t match. And then, the supervisor had a
boss, who wasn’t supportive of me either. The experience with my supervisors was not nice.”
168
said Idayu. She described her hospital placement in Toowamba, Australia as particularly
challenging. Idayu stated, “I was emotionally and physically tired. After Toowamba, I was pretty
crushed.” She continued and shared, “In the end, I was given a fail. I got zero in everything,
which was heartbreaking. It was like I had regressed because the previous year I had done well.”
Positive learning environments she needed to develop, and grow were not seemingly available.
In addition, it seemed that there was lack of effective and active communication which
hindered learning, causing Idayu more psychological distress. She shared her frustration upon
finding out that she was failed by her supervisor,
I was really shocked because my supervisor never gave me any hints about it (clinical
assessment). Before that, she was always telling me like, “Good job!” She was that kind
of person. That’s why I was really heartbroken when I found about my (clinical
assessment) results. I wished they had told me about it earlier. I had two supervisors, one
was a senior and the other one was my main supervisor, whom I worked with, four days a
week. And the person giving me this (clinical assessment) talk was the supervisor whom
I only worked with once a week!
Idayu indicated that she was not getting timely and frequent feedback from her supervisors that
would otherwise have alerted her to areas of her work that needed improvements or better
performance.
Furthermore, Idayu indicated that her supervisors showed little confidence in her ability
to progress and perform better at her clinical tasks. She was asked to quit numerous times over
the duration of her placement. Idayu shared,
My one-day supervisor, she told me to quit. This was in the middle of placement, the
third week. And yeah, I told her multiple times that I’m going to still try to do better, and
169
not quit. I was like, I’m supposed to struggle because I’m still learning. Then she said,
“Okay, but if you want to quit then it’s fine too.” She constantly told me to quit. It was
hard. It was always short with her. She’d tell me to quit, but I’d reply back and say I’ll
continue.
Idayu’s clinical placement experience would have been more positive had her clinical
supervisors been able to build greater trust, develop effective communication strategies, and had
been more enthusiastic in maintaining professional interpersonal relationships with her.
Cultural biases. A few of the participants perceived that they were imparted a significant
deal of cultural biases and discrimination during clinical placements. “At some point, I felt I was
treated unfairly by my supervisors because I was a foreign student,” said Idayu. She added, “I
got judged for my accent, and they would comment like, can you speak in an Australian accent
more?” She then shared another example where her supervisors displayed a lack of awareness of
cultural bias, “You know for us, we would always excuse ourselves when we want to leave to get
something. But then, they would mark me down for doing this, for not showing confidence. A lot
of my Singaporean friends experienced this too. It’s ridiculous, it’s hard.”
Another participant stopped wearing headscarves to work upon hearing accounts of other
students who were treated differently for wearing them. “I heard stories about supervisors
discriminating people wearing tudong (hijab), and you can fail. That made me scared so, every
time I go for placements, I didn’t wear my tudong,” said Yasmin. Zaffran also shared a less
positive experience he had as a medical intern,
I remember this one time during my clinical year. There was this doctor, he was using his
phone and suddenly the phone broke down, crashed. He seemed frustrated and then he
said to me, “You people make useless technologies!” He probably thought I was from
170
China! The sad thing was that my friends, my colleagues, they didn’t take that comment
very well. They made a complaint to medical school about it. Personally, I didn’t really
find it offensive, but my friends didn’t feel the same way. In the end, the doctor actually
had to make an apology to me.
In this aspect, participants implied that the ineptness of clinical supervisors in understanding and
responding to cultural differences were detrimental to their learning experiences.
When asked how institutions can improve the experiences of international students at
clinical placements, Idayu replied,
People are different, cultures are different, and I accepted that easily. But somehow, with
all their emphases on education about the (Australian) indigenous population, they didn’t
think how that overlapped with us, the international students. Like, you already have
these skills, you already have the information, why don’t you apply them to us, too?
Technically, it’s the same, we also come from different cultural backgrounds. Their
expectations about us were a bit disappointing for me.
Participants identified both issues of application of knowledge and behavioral problems related
to the lack of knowledge and skills of clinical supervisors in responding to cultural issues
especially when dealing with ethnically minority international students.
Work environment adjustment. Participants were placed across different clinical
environments throughout their programs which meant that they had to adjust to varying working
environments every time they started a new clinical placement. Yasmin accounted,
I was constantly put in a new setting. Just when I was getting used to uni, I had to go for
my first placement. That was for three months and when that’s done, back to uni. And not
long after, I had to go for another placement (at a different place). So, there were
171
constantly new settings for me to go into. Every time I go for placement, I had the same
worry, like oh, I had to fit in again, especially in a new environment that I’m not familiar
with.
Idayu expressed a similar sentiment,
Every placement, they would have to teach me from the ground up because I wouldn’t
know. Even the hospital system, they would have to teach me everything because I just
don’t understand their system. I was always, as a foreigner, at a disadvantage.
The recurring change of placement environments posed continual adjustment difficulties for
participants.
Participants also encountered adjustment issues when working with peers and patients
from different cultures. For example, Zaffran found it challenging to connect to the varying
experiences, values, and preferences of patients that he met at his clinical settings. Zaffran
explained, “Patients were from all different cultures, so it was hard to relate to the patients.
That’s different when you’re consulting Bruneian patients. When you consult non-Bruneians, it’s
hard to relate or understand why they do certain things.” Suria compared the interpersonal
interactions she experienced on campus and in clinical environments,
My placement environments were the opposite of the university, still multicultural but
not as welcoming and warm. Maybe people were just too busy doing their own work and
you just had to mind your own business. You’re not treated as a student anymore except
by your supervisor. Warm and welcoming on the first day, but after that people just went
on doing their own work. Again, the environments were totally different.
As international students, participants experienced intricate challenges adjusting to the prevailing
work environments and working with people from different cultures.
172
On-campus tutor support. Data also revealed that the quality of support provided by
personal tutors and faculty members influenced how students persisted throughout their clinical
placements. Amirah described the negative emotions she felt during a meeting with her personal
tutor after failing her clinical placement,
At that point my personal tutor was having doubts about me because I had already failed
my exams in the first semester, and now (second semester) I have also failed my
placement. “Do you want to quit?” she said that to me. And then she said, “Yeah you
should quit.” That was when I got really offended. I really wanted to prove her wrong.
Fortunately for Amirah, she was able to turn negative emotions into positive results by focusing
on her goals and giving as much as she could to prepare for her approaching exams. “I didn’t
want to quit back then because physio is something that I’ve always wanted to do,” said Amirah.
She added,
Although I was offended with what my personal tutor said, I actually like her and I’m
grateful that I had her. Yes, she told me to quit, but I guess at the same time, I wanted
someone to tell me that I wasn’t okay, and I needed to get help.
Amirah appreciated the time and energy that was invested by her personal tutor to try help her
improve. She learned to accept failure, showed grit, self-efficacy, and, notably, learned the
importance of persistence.
In Idayu’s case, she attributed her persistence and success to her university’s clinical
liaison officer, who provided encouragement and support during and throughout the worst times
of her placement. Idayu accounted,
Lucy told me not to give up, she gave me strategies, she was really helpful and helped me
clear my mind. She let me cry in front of her too. She visited me, gave me advice, and I
173
would email her my goals. I basically told her everything.
The following excerpt describe the empathy, compassion, and regard that Lucy provided for
Idayu,
Lucy was my savior. Lucy would call me every three days. She would check in, she’d ask
me what I did that day, did I set my goals. She came to visit me at the hospital twice, to
see me and to talk to my supervisors. She told me not to give up, she gave me strategies,
she was really helpful and helped me cleared my mind. And she let me cry in front of her,
too.
Participants sought support from their personal tutors and faculty members to help them get
through emotionally challenging times at clinical placements. The quality of support and
encouragement they received had significant impacts on their wellbeing and influenced how they
persisted to degree completion.
To summarize, the group of participants who were enrolled in health professional
programs spent a large share of their educational experiences in clinical placements. They
seemed to struggle to find balance between demands of academics and stresses of clinical
practice. Participants talked about four main challenges they encountered throughout placements
which hindered learning and affected persistence: (1) burnout and mental exhaustion, (2) being
emotionally overwhelmed with difficult supervisory relationships, (3) cultural biases, and (4)
difficulties adjusting to the varying working cultures and environments. Finally, participants
shared how they endured these challenges and the type of support they sought and received from
institutions particularly from personal tutors and faculty members responsible for coordinating
clinical placements.
174
Theme Five: Academic and Psychological Outcomes
Previous sections illustrated how participants’ persistence to degree completion was
indirectly affected by participants’ pre-entry inputs, their experiences transitioning into the new
cultures of their sojourn locations, institutional experiences, and their experiences at clinical
placements and internships. This category describes academic and psychological outcomes that
had direct influence on successful persistence: (1) academic performance, (2) mental health
issues, (3) student’s satisfaction, (4) sense of belonging, and (5) commitment to goals.
Academic performance. Participants were asked if there were aware of Malay students
who did not complete their study programs abroad. One participant shared that she decided to
start fresh and enroll in a university in Australia after performing poorly academically during the
first year of her program in a university in the United Kingdom. Sofia conveyed, “I didn’t get
through my first year in the U.K. I was in Warwick for one year and I didn’t get through. I didn’t
have choice, but leave, because my grades were really poor.” Other participants shared
information about Malay students who dropped out of their programs because of poor academic
achievements.
From the stories they shared about friends and other Malay students who failed to
finish, poor academic performance and mental health issues represented two major reasons why
Malay students do not complete their undergraduate programs abroad. The challenges and
pressures of a new culture, new learning environment, and new education system affected how
Malay students experienced higher education abroad. “Yes, I know some students did not
complete because of academic problems and the pressures of studying abroad,” mentioned Putri.
Failure to overcome these challenges precipitated poor academic results that eventually led to
dismissals and scholarship terminations. Zurina described this succinctly,
175
He was my junior. He was struggling with academics for two semesters. His scholarship
was finally stopped. I know that he had language problems too, he had difficulties
understanding the concepts that were being taught in class. It didn’t help that the ways we
learn there are different from what we are used to here (in Brunei).
Unsatisfactory academic performance was a significant reason why Malay students failed to
finish their study programs.
First-year academic adjustment and academic performance were particularly critical.
Most students were either dismissed by their universities or had their scholarships terminated
after failing to show evidence of academic progress during their first two semesters in higher
education. “They were failing and their scholarships got terminated,” said Yasmin. “She could
not complete the (program) requirements to progress to the next (academic) year and her
scholarship was terminated by the (Bruneian) government,” said Hafiza. “I know a girl in my uni
who didn’t complete her degree (program) because she wasn’t doing well academically…She
was only there for the first year. The next year she was dismissed (by the university),” said
Kamarul. Many returned to their home countries to re-enroll in higher education programs at
local institutions.
Mental health wellbeing. Malay students who enroll abroad to pursue their studies are
more often than not high achievers who are used to performing well academically throughout
their secondary education back home. That being so, data showed that they were more likely to
develop mental health problems such as depression and anxiety when they found themselves not
performing as well academically in their programs abroad. This often happened when they were
no longer able to get grades that they were accustomed. “I had a few friends who had depression,
mostly due to low grades. Their grades were not meeting their expectations,” said Rosma. Sofia
176
shared a similar opinion, “I don’t remember why she got depressed. I think, maybe when you
don’t achieve the results that you wanted, that’s when you begin to get depressed. Like my
friend, she’s so used to getting good results.” Kamarul shared a narrative about his friend who
developed depression due to the high expectations he had placed on academic grades,
Our culture is more closed. When we have problems, we tend not to talk much about
them. For example, there was this one student who got really depressed. And we only
knew about his problem very late when things got really critical. Turned out he had
depression. He wasn’t failing, but he was getting second class, which for many people is
okay, not that bad. Friends were saying he stopped talking. Nobody knew what really
happened. He finally left and I think he had clinical sessions here in (Brunei) to help him
with his depression. He’s better now.
Thus, students who delayed seeking timely help or failed to seek assistance at all during the early
stages of difficulties often led to further deterioration of their mental health wellbeing.
In another example, Sofia explained that it was harder to get high level grades at
universities in the United Kingdom in comparison to universities in Australia, which made it so
demoralizing for her. She succinctly illustrated,
You see, I experienced both the U.K. and Australia. The same thing (depression)
happened to me when I was in the U.K. In the U.K., it’s difficult to score good marks.
Like to get an A in the U.K., I think you’d need to score more than 70. In Australia, to get
an A, you’d need to score more than 75, but still, you can get A’s. In the U.K. it’s harder.
That’s so depressing.
Similarly, Sofia’s outstanding pre-university academic success brought about high expectations
of academic achievements and created added pressures when she was studying abroad. Failure to
177
meet these expectations had powerful negative impacts on the emotional and mental wellbeing of
Malay students.
Data showed that nearly all participants who studied in the United Kingdom either knew
someone or have heard about other Malay students who had to leave their programs because of
depression. In addition to academic pressures, students were also affected by family and personal
problems that wore them down emotionally. Suria and Ziana also shared narratives about the
impacts of their friends’ personal problems on their mental health wellbeing. Suria shared,
I know one Malaysian Malay. It’s a sad story. She was failing and was having mental
health problems, like depression and anxiety. Besides that, she also had family problems…
She had a big scholarship and was under pressure to get good results. Many things weren’t
working well for her.
Ziana accounted,
I heard about a couple of students who were sent back to Brunei because of their mental
health problems. Actually, I have friends who were clinically diagnosed with depression,
anxiety, and other mental health illnesses. They weren’t able to focus on their studies that
much. I think there were various issues that triggered their depression like being isolated,
being far away from home, overwhelmed with the amount of work, a lot of things.
The excerpts above indicated that there has been an increasing prevalence of Malay students with
mental illnesses such as depression, anxiety, lack of motivation, and being overwhelmed. Data
revealed that poor academic performance and mental illness have become the leading reasons
why Malay students drop out of their undergraduate programs abroad. Students tended to
develop mental health issues when they found themselves not meeting their academic
178
expectations. Others found it hard to cope with social pressures of their new cultural, academic,
and living environments.
Commitment to goals. Commitment to personal, academic, and career goals were found
to be the most compelling pattern that directly increased participants’ persistence levels.
Participants manifested strong determination and hard work to commit to initial educational
goals and be successful. All twenty-eight participants entered higher education with established
educational goals that were measurable, attainable, relevant, and timely; and were fully
cognizant that accomplishing these short-term educational goals was vital in their pursuit of
long-term career goals. Suria illustrated,
I never had any thoughts about dropping out because I fought to get this degree. And I
had to fight to get through each year. Those battles would have been wasted if I decided
not to continue. I constantly looked towards my future. I want to be a physiotherapist and
I can only be one by getting this degree.
Participants showed subsequent high commitment to their goals of completing their
bachelor’s degrees despite encountering various challenges and problems during and throughout
their programs. For most participants, however, simply completing their programs was not a
significant accomplishment. “Most of the time, I was aiming for a First-class degree. So, a
challenge would be, when I don’t,” said Suriani. Another participant, Hassan, stated,
I made sure I achieved the goals I set every semester. These goals depend on how hard
the modules were. Like, if the module was hard, I’d aim for a B, minimum. But my end-
goal was to graduate with a First-class degree. I managed to do that too.
Like most participants, Suriani and Hassan kept their expectations high, remained consistent with
their goals to complete their chosen degree programs on time, and were strongly motivated to
179
score high grades and attain a high degree classification. Both of them were able to follow and
stick to a plan of action that enabled them to achieve their goals of being awarded First-Class
honors degrees.
The commitment to her goal was a powerful motivational factor for Amirah when she
was going through the most difficult period of her program. In fact, at a time when she was
berated for failing her exams and placement, Amirah refocused on her goals and decided to
muster all her remaining strength to progress and finish, “My motivation went up, and I gave my
absolute everything.” “Look at me now, I made it!” said Amirah. She advised future Malay
students who wish to study abroad to “never give up and not be afraid of failures.” Idayu echoed
the same unwavering determination to finish despite being told to quit repeatedly by her clinical
supervisor. “I told her that I’m going to still try to do better, and not quit. Yeah, I never
considered moving or dropping out,” said Idayu. Participants were clear about their academic
purpose. They had high commitments to their goals, which allowed them to overcome severe
challenges and complete their programs.
Some participants developed greater goals to advance to a postgraduate degree. Three
years after finishing her bachelor’s degree in the United Kingdom, Hani is now starting her first
semester of her doctorate degree. She spoke how her college experience played a big role in
influencing her decision to continue pursuing higher degrees. Hani accounted, “I found that my
strength was that I love reading research, I love reading articles, I love analyzing. That’s why I
wanted to enroll in a research-based master’s program. And now I’m starting my Ph.D.” Fatimah
also developed a stronger commitment to her educational goal and is looking forward to pursuing
a master’s program as part of a path to a doctorate degree,
My goal was to do well and get my bachelor’s degree. But then, I began to realize that I
180
can go on to do my honors, and after that, my PhD. Actually, I’m meeting a potential
advisor this afternoon at UTB (Universiti Teknologi Brunei), to discuss a possible
research study for my Master’s.
Consistent with Spady’s (1970), Tinto’s (1975, 1987, 1993), Bean’s (1980), Pascarella
(1980), Bean and Metzner’s (1985), and Cabrera, Nora, and Castaneda’s (1993) models, this
study found that commitment to initial education, career, and personal goals significantly
influenced Malay students’ persistence levels and motivation to complete their programs.
Sense of belonging. Earlier evidences suggest that forming positive social connections
with individuals and groups on- and off-campus was crucial in enhancing participants’ sense of
belonging. This included establishing memberships and long-lasting connections with
communities and associations: the Bruneian and Malay communities on and around campus,
Bruneian Students’ Societies, international students, religious associations, residence halls peers,
campus clubs, faculty, personal tutors, and departments; all of which were crucial in facilitating
participants’ smooth transition, academic- and cultural adjustments. The Bruneian and Malay
community, Bruneian Students’ Societies, and religious associations on campus were important
cultural advocation mediums utilized by participants to strengthen and express their cultural
values and identities.
All participants communicated their refusal to be culturally assimilated. They sought
cultural familiarity and persisted to graduation while maintaining their cultural identities.
Participants attributed their persistence and success, for the most part, to institutional actions that
were culturally responsive and proactive in affirming the cultural integrity of ethnic minority
student groups on campus. These actions and practices included:
1) creating environments that validate students’ cultural values and identities,
181
2) engaging ethnic minority students with a more collectivist orientation learning
experience,
3) developing meaningful relationships with students,
4) providing the means for positive cross-cultural engagements,
5) proactively providing resources and information to students from diverse racial and
ethnic groups, and
6) providing holistic support for students.
As indicated by the data, these actions and practices made participants felt valued as members of
their institutions which resulted in increased motivation, involvement, and persistence. In
contrast, incidences of unjust cultural biases and discriminatory treatments were detrimental to
participants’ sense of belonging.
The Proposed Grounded Theory
The substantive theoretical model of the persistence of SEA Malay students is presented
in Figure 17. The model accounts for all theoretical themes, categories, and sub-categories that
emerged at the end of selective coding. SEA Malay students encounter multiple persistence
obstacles (i.e., academic challenges and cultural differences), and undergo varying levels of
persistence at different phases of their study abroad program, which are influenced to varying
degrees by the strategies they use to successfully navigate these obstacles. The model explains
Malay students’ success as a longitudinal process which moves along a continuum that includes
four core spatiotemporal stages that are navigated through by students: (1) Pre-departure, (2)
Transition, (3) Institution/Program, and (4) Outcome. The model proffers within each of these
stages, risk factors that can affect SEA Malay students’ decisions to persist.
182
Figure 20. The substantive Model of The Persistence of Southeast Asian Malay Students Studying Abroad.
183
Firstly, the demographics and characteristics of incoming SEA Malay students (i.e., age,
home country, secondary education background, cultural values, aspirations, and expectations)
affect the interactions they have with the academic and social environments of their host
institutions. These pre-entry inputs are directly related to how Malay students navigate the
dominant culture in the United Kingdom, Australia, the United States, and New Zealand.
Secondly, the model provides an understanding and explanation of the cultural, social,
and academic transitioning issues that Malay students encounter as they move into and progress
through higher education. Malay students experience significant cultural dissonance and
dramatic adjustments as they attempt to comprehend unfamiliar cultural values, belief systems,
and social expectations of the new environments they are entering. To stabilize the transition
experience, students must address academic and non-academic needs and resolve transitional
issues such as housing, social connections, dietary restrictions, and academic adjustments. A
main barrier to social and academic adjustments for many Malay students is the lack of English
language proficiency particularly coping with conversational English. Hence, the availability and
accessibility of English language support and resources will assist Malay students to overcome
this major cultural stressor. In order to persist, it is important that Malay students set academic,
career, and personal goals that are attainable, relevant, and time bounded. Prioritizing goals at the
start of their programs provide direction, fuel motivation, control performance, and increase
persistence.
Thirdly, the model emphasizes two distinct learning environments that have powerful and
long-lasting impacts on Malay students’ persistence: (1) Campus environments, where traditional
learning interactions occur in classrooms, laboratories, and workshops, and (2) Clinical
placement/internship environments, where experiential learning interactions occur in real
184
workplace situations. However, it is integral that both these learning environments are equally
sensitive, relevant, and responsive to cultural differences and unique needs of diverse student
populations. Culturally sensitive and culturally competent institutions are more likely to see
higher persistence rates amongst its racially and ethnically minority students including the Malay
student population. These institutions strive to enhance awareness of the values, customs, and
norms of different racial and ethnic groups of students and seek to understand their complex
interpersonal behaviors. The model suggests that culturally sensitive and culturally competent
campuses are characterized by: (1) cultural familiarity, (2) culturally validating environments,
(3) collectivist cultural orientations, (4) humanized education environments, (5) opportunities for
meaningful cross-cultural engagement, (6) proactive philosophies, (7) availability of holistic
support, (8) multi- and inter-disciplinary approaches to learning, and (9) scaffolding academic
transition. Malay students are expected to find the clinical placement and internship parts of their
programs as exceptionally challenging. Lack of working experience, lack of generic and
specialist healthcare skills, and feeling overwhelmed by high patient care workloads, are notable
contributing factors that can lead to students’ burnout and mental stress
Finally, four consequential factors are directly related to students’ persistence to degree
completion: (1) academic performance, (2) mental health wellbeing, (3) commitment to goals,
and (4) sense of belonging. A Malay student who is failing academically will either get his or her
scholarship terminated or be forced to withdraw by the institution. Students who are struggling to
cope with academic pressures and work stressors are also likely to develop mental illnesses.
Negligence of mental, emotional, and physical wellbeing are detrimental to student success.
Failure to seek and access help will eventually result in students dropping out. Hence, having a
strong support system is crucial for students during and throughout their study programs.
185
Students’ persistence and success are also directly influenced by their commitments to initial
goals. Students who are committed to staying focused on their academic, career, and personal
goals are more determined and motivated to persist to degree completion. In essence, students
will achieve the highest levels of persistence when their collegiate experiences (i.e., academic,
social, and cultural interactions) are aligned with their academic, career, and personal goals.
Lastly, students’ sense of belonging to their institutions are impacted by the positive experiences,
interactions, and emotional connections they share with campus communities. Students who
perceive themselves as valued members of their institutions will demonstrate higher persistence
levels and desire to finish.
Conclusion
This study analyzed data collected from 28 participants who studied in the United
Kingdom, Australia, the United States, and New Zealand. Participants were asked semi-
structured interview questions that aimed to explore their academic, social, and cultural
experiences while studying abroad, the persistence challenges and obstacles they encountered,
the varying actions and practices that were employed by institutions to engage students, and how
and why Malay students persisted to degree completion. Results of data analyses i.e., open
coding, axial coding, and selective coding generated five emergent theoretical themes and 31
sub-themes. The theoretical integration of these theoretical themes and sub-themes resulted in
the construction of the substantive theoretical model of the persistence of Southeast Asian Malay
students studying in higher education institutions abroad.
186
CHAPTER 5. IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSION
The purpose of this study was to develop a substantive grounded theory for
understanding the process of Malay students’ persistence from Southeast Asia. This study
investigated the experiences of 28 SEA Malay participants from Brunei who had graduated in the
last three years from colleges and universities in the United Kingdom, Australia, the United
States, and New Zealand. In Chapter 4, the data, findings, and emergent theoretical model were
presented. The process of data analysis began with the transcribing of participants’ interviews
followed by the three phases of open coding, axial coding, and selective coding where codes
were generated, organized, and finally integrated around the core concept of Malay student
persistence. Participants succinctly described key persistence factors from pre-arrival to program
completion. These factors are illustrated in Figure 17 which shows the proposed process of
persisting to degree completion for SEA Malay students studying abroad. Chapter 5 discusses the
key findings of the study as they are related to literature on student persistence and provides
comparisons with conceptual frameworks. I also discuss the implications of the developed
substantive model including how the generalizability of the model may be increased and
transitioned to a formal grounded theory. Additionally, I highlight implications of the findings to
future practice and research, along with a concluding section.
Discussion of Key Findings
The research question posed for this study was: How do Malay students from Southeast
Asia persist to degree completion when enrolling in higher education in the United Kingdom, the
United States, Australia, and New Zealand? The intention was to describe specific processes,
experiences, and course of actions that SEA Malay students took to complete their undergraduate
programs at institutions of higher education abroad. In addition to comparing previous findings
187
on college student persistence, the goal of this study was to address a gap in the literature by
studying a population that has not been examined in prior student persistence research. More
specifically, it aimed to construct a comprehensive theoretical model of SEA Malay student
persistence by examining the impacts of cultural differences on SEA Malay students’ success in
higher education.
Expected findings. While the conceptual frameworks provided a coherent argument
linking academic and social integration with academic success, only Museus’ (2014) CECE
model has attempted to explain higher education persistence from the perspectives of ethnic and
racial minority student populations in the United States. When I started this study, I anticipated
that data analyses would reveal connections between findings and the conceptual frameworks -
the CECE model in particular. Also, due to immense differences in beliefs, behaviors, languages,
practices, and expressions, I believed that participants would have experienced some level of
psychological distress while trying to familiarize with new cultures and interact with new people.
The idea of making social and academic adjustments, establishing connections with faculty and
peers, seeking help and support, and improving sense of belonging were expected to have major
impacts on how SEA Malay students succeed in higher education abroad. These elements have
been extensively discussed in prior research on how students experience success in higher
education.
Summary of findings. In comparison, my substantive model is different from the
conceptual frameworks. The model ushers in the spatiotemporal stages (i.e., pre-arrival,
transition, institutional/program, and outcome stages) that Malay students undergo while
studying abroad and proffers within each of these stages, risk factors that can affect their
decisions to persist. The model is not constrained to focus only upon the behavioral
188
competencies and cognitive attributes of the student as an individual. It does not place particular
significance on academic and social integration in impacting students’ success. In contrast, the
model contends that an institution’s presence of cultural relevance and cultural responsiveness
had powerful impacts on the experiences and outcomes of SEA Malay students. Furthermore, the
model introduces a salient component i.e., clinical placement and internship environments, that
distinguishes it from the conceptual frameworks. This component serves as a key finding as I did
not anticipate that participants’ performances were at risk of deteriorating when exposed to
complex and high-risk situations in clinical placements. Some participants even described
experiencing a high level of traumatic events when undertaking clinical placements.
The following sections highlight key study findings that include: (1) struggling with
clinical placements, (2) leveraging academic success on institutional practices of cultural
relevance and cultural responsiveness, (3) surviving transition shock, (4) religious commitment,
and (5) achieving success through grit and self-efficacy.
Struggling with clinical placements. Evidences showed that SEA Malay students in the
United Kingdom and Australia were struggling and failing their clinical placement contexts
across all healthcare programs they were enrolled. Findings indicated that Malay students found
it particularly challenging to manage high patient care workloads and at the same time keeping
pace with other academic requirements. A number of the participants reported experiencing
burnout due to work and academic pressures. This is further accentuated by their lack of work
experience, limited skills, as well as difficulties transitioning into the placement environment.
Hamshire, Willgoss, and Wibberley (2012) confirmed that the most significant challenge for
healthcare students was, in fact, meeting the requirement of completing clinical training
alongside their academic studies. They emphasized that new students may experience
189
considerable stress during placements, especially when trying to adjust to clinical workloads and
attending to sick patients.
In addition, findings substantiate the importance of English language proficiency for
successful clinical placements. A number of authors have posited that international students’
struggle in clinical placements due to lack of English language competency, poor communication
skills, and difficulties relating to cultural adjustment and learning (Abu-Arab & Parry, 2015;
Attrill, Lincoln, & McAllister, 2012; Attrill, Lincoln, & McAllister, 2016; Mikkonen, Elo,
Kuivila, Tuomikoski, & Kaariainen, 2016; San Miguel & Rogan, 2015). Comparatively, Attrill,
Lincoln, and McAllister (2012) highlighted that international students must acquire high levels
of cultural literacy and language proficiency for them to successfully comprehend and negotiate
complex clinical environment norms, standards, and practices.
However, Davenport, Hewat, Ferguson, McAllister, and Lincoln (2018) argued that
previous studies that investigated struggling and failing health professional students undertaking
clinical placements were conducted mainly from the perspectives of clinical supervisors and
educators. Based on their critical review of 69 papers published between 1988 and 2017,
Davenport et al. (2018) accounted that previous investigations had disregarded students’ voice
which is crucial for developing better understanding and deeper insights on students’ difficulties
and failures in clinical contexts. Conversely, I interviewed six participants who undertook
clinical placements during their study abroad which allowed me to explore the challenges they
encountered in their clinical environments. Findings illustrated key relationships between
students and clinical supervisors, and their interactions with colleagues, patients, and the work
environment surrounding them. Challenging supervisory relationships and cultural biases were
particularly detrimental to Malay students’ clinical learning experiences.
190
Discussions regarding the use of culturally competent approaches to improve the quality
of interactions between healthcare professionals and patients have dominated research
surrounding healthcare in recent years (Cabán-Alemán, King, Padilla, & Tse, 2019; Diaz,
Navarro, & Chen, 2019; FitzGerald & Hurst, 2017; Henderson, Horne, Hills, & Kendall, 2018;
McQuaid & Landier, 2018). However, little research has been conducted to explore how
workplace cultural biases impact international students undertaking clinical placements. Idayu
illustrated this frustration,
People are different, cultures are different, and I accepted that easily. But somehow, with
all their emphases on education about the (Australian) indigenous population, they didn’t
think how that overlapped with us, the international students. Like, you already have
these skills, you already have the information, why don’t you apply them to us too?
Despite the strong impetus placed on institutionalizing cultural knowledge and cultural
competence, Idayu felt that institutions and healthcare providers failed to consider the substantial
overlap that exist between international students and racially diverse patients when
operationalizing cross-cultural healthcare approaches.
A study by Mikkonen et al. (2016) underlined the significant influence that clinical
supervisors’ attitudes have on the clinical learning, experiences, and outcomes of culturally and
linguistically diverse healthcare students during clinical placements. Their study found:
• Culturally and linguistically diverse students and their clinical supervisors require
time, well prepared pedagogical orientation, as well as cultural and language
education to be successfully integrated into a clinical environment;
• Full-time international students are more likely to experience discrimination and
social isolation than short-term exchange students and domestic students; and
191
• Culturally and linguistically diverse students experienced positive learning
experiences and were able to overcome language and cultural barriers when they are
immersed in positive clinical environments.
In another study, findings from data collected involving 1080 students in the United
Kingdom, Hamshire, Willgoss, and Wibberley (2012) inferred three distinct reasons why
healthcare students considered leaving their program: (1) dissatisfaction associated with campus-
based learning and support, (2) problems related to clinical placements, and (3) concerns and
challenges around personal circumstances (p. 891). Study participants highlighted that support
from personal tutors and institutional educators were particularly important in helping them push
through challenging clinical placement experiences.
Leveraging academic success on institutional practices of cultural relevance and
cultural responsiveness. Participants arrived on campus with their own cultural, social, and
education resources that were different from other student populations on campus. The ways
SEA Malay students navigate cultural and religious differences, their levels of self-efficacy,
cross-cultural competence, decision-making, and variations in interactions and expectations may
be different from other diverse student populations. Their varying prior academic preparation,
contrasting learning patterns and expectations about learning, as well as a different first language
can be perceived as problematic by faculty and staff. Thus, Lindsey (2008) elaborated that there
is a need for a paradigm shift “from viewing others as problematic to viewing how one works
with people different from one’s self in a manner to ensure effective practices” (p. 21). Findings
of this study provided evidence that many institutions of higher education in the United
Kingdom, Australia, the United States, and New Zealand were already demonstrating examples
cultural relevance and cultural responsiveness to diverse student populations. For example,
192
institutions provided safe spaces for conducting religious activities on-campus and offered
flexible exam times for Muslim students during the fasting month of Ramadan. Participants
emphasized that culturally relevant and responsive practices recognized and validated their
cultural identities which was integral to their sense of belonging and academic persistence.
In their study on the success of Southeast Asian American (SEAA) college students,
Maramba and Palmer (2014) found that it was crucial for SEAA students to experience a sense
of cultural validation and cultural advocacy by maintaining connections with traditions and
cultural communities. Maramba and Palmer (2014) added that SEAA students’ sense of cultural
validation and sense of belonging can be significantly improved by: (1) engaging them in Asian
American-related courses that provide opportunities to discuss ethnic minority issues, (2)
forming or participating in ethnic organizations, and (3) involving themselves in their ethnic
communities outside of campus setting.
Museus, Zhang, and Kim (2016) identified five criteria that can be used to gauge the
degree in which institutions are culturally relevant to diverse student populations: (1) cultural
familiarity, (2) culturally relevant knowledge, (3) cultural community service, (4) cross-cultural
engagement, and (5) cultural validation. In addition to cultural relevance, they identified four
criteria that can be used to gauge the responsiveness of institutions to the cultural norms and
needs of diverse student populations: (1) collectivist cultural orientations, (2) humanized
educational environments, (4) proactive philosophies, and (5) holistic support (Museus, Zhang,
& Kim, 2016). Indeed, this study illustrates that seven of the nine primary indicators of Museus’
(2014) CECE model were directly relevant to SEA Malay students: (1) cultural familiarity, (2)
culturally validating environments, (3) collectivist cultural orientations, (4) humanized education
193
environments, (5) opportunities for meaningful cross-cultural engagement, (6) proactive
philosophies, and (7) availability of holistic support.
Participants succinctly described wide-ranging examples of how these indicators
impacted their persistence. First, cultural familiarity was mentioned most frequently and
appeared to be particularly crucial during the transition phase. Participants looked for
opportunities to establish connections and relationships with culturally or ethnically alike
individuals on and near campus who could provide them with support and guidance. Second,
culturally validating environments were clearly impactful in facilitating a greater sense of
belonging by making participants felt that they were valued members of their campus
communities. Third, collectivist cultural orientations and opportunities for meaningful cross-
cultural engagement were important in enhancing involvement, facilitating community building,
and maximizing positive interactions between participants and different student populations on
campus. Finally, the presence of humanized education environments, proactive philosophies, and
availability of holistic support such as meaningful relationships with faculty and staff who were
devoted to ensuring students’ success, the extra efforts to provide students with support and care
resources, and positive relationships with committed personal tutors allowed participants to
thrive and be successful. These gave participants significant leverage in managing the academic
and social challenges they encountered while studying abroad.
Surviving transition shock. The Anglo and Southern Asia cultures are situated on
opposite halves of the GLOBE model reflecting great cultural distances that exist between
countries that constitute the two disparate culture clusters (House et al., 2004). Both culture
clusters exhibit distinct patterns of cultural values that distinguish them from each other. Coming
from a highly collectivist culture that emphasizes commitment to home, religious affiliation, and
194
interconnectedness of family, it is unsurprising that participants experienced emotional
discomfort and stress when trying to navigate the more individualistic cultures of their sojourn
locations. According to Hofstede, Hofstede, and Minkov (2010), the United States, the United
Kingdom, and Australia are, in fact, the most individualistic of all cultures. Unfamiliar people,
places, streets, food, and communication patterns contributed to culture shock, cultural
misunderstandings, and affected participants’ feelings of safety and belonging.
However, not all participants experienced transitional stress in the same way. Some
participants developed coping abilities that made the transition process less problematic, while
others found it harder and required additional time to adjust. Nevertheless, the transition period
has an immense impact on students’ persistence. McLachlan and Justice (2009) reported that
international students experienced considerable amounts of transition stress during their first six
to twelve months in the United States which were primarily caused by academic, cultural, and
social differences.
This study found several prevalent transitional themes that can put Malay students at risk
of dropping out which include: (1) homesickness and depression, (2) difficulties finding safe and
affordable housing, (3) problems establishing social connections, (4) lack of English language
proficiency, (5) food needs, (6) religious differences, and (7) difficulties adjusting to new
learning patterns and a new education system. These risk factors are inextricably intertwined and
substantiates the importance of an integral support system that can assist Malay students and
other ethnically diverse student populations with their social, psychological, and academic
adjustments. Weng, Cheong, and Cheong (2010) suggested that poor academic performance is
possibly symptomatic of students facing difficulties adjusting to the university environment
which increases the likelihood of them dropping out. SEA Malay students who study abroad are
195
more often than not high-achieving individuals who are used to performing well academically
back home. Hence, they are more likely to develop psychological problems when they find
themselves not performing as well academically in higher education institutions abroad.
Therefore, this study strengthens the position that the quality and level of support have powerful
impacts on students’ transition experiences and their decisions to persist in their programs.
Although participants indicated their unwillingness to assimilate, they showed respect,
openness, flexibility, and adaptability to the cultures of their host countries. They enjoyed being
immersed in new cultures, and gradually learned to navigate cultural differences well. Rew,
Becker, Cookston, Khosropour, and Martinez (2003) claimed that incoming students can
transition better into a new cultural environment and adjust themselves to the cross-cultural
norms of their sojourn locations by developing cultural competence i.e., developing cultural
awareness, cultural sensitivity, cultural knowledge, and cultural skills.
Achieving success through self-efficacy and grit. Participants were intrinsically
motivated and self-determined toward achieving success. Nevertheless, their motivation levels
were influenced by the interactions they had with environmental factors such as faculty,
supervisors, and peers. Participants were, in many ways, highly goal-oriented individuals;
possessing two main personality traits that enabled them to raise commitment levels to
accomplish goals i.e., self-efficacy and grit. Bandura and Wood (1989) defined self-efficacy as
“beliefs in one’s capabilities to mobilize the motivation, cognitive resources, and courses of
action needed to meet given situational demands” (p. 408). On the other hand, grit is “the
perseverance and passion for long-term goals” (Duckworth, Peterson, Matthews, & Kelly, 2007,
p. 1087).
196
Bandura (1989) remarked that people with high levels of self-efficacy are more likely to
have strong motivation and persistence to accomplish goals in spite of discouraging obstacles.
Participants did appear to lose some sense of self-efficacy when they were met with setbacks and
failures. However, they did not hesitate to seek help from campus agents and friends to assist in
recovery and achieving positive outcomes. They were especially motivated to seek help from
faculty and staff with problems involving failure, anxiety, fear, and depression. More
importantly, when participants were inundated with contemptuous feedback and were
overwhelmed with stress and anxiety; they relied heavily on grit to ensure that their long-term
goals were not derailed. Duckworth et al. (2007) explained that gritty individuals “not only
finishes his tasks at hand, but pursues a given aim over years” (p. 1089). In particular, gritty
individuals do not veer from their long-term goals even when deprived of positive feedback
(Duckworth et al., 2007).
Like other international students, participants arrived at their sojourn locations with a
wide range of expectations which impacted their ensuing experiences. Findings indicated that
participants encountered unexpected difficulties during the transition phase especially as they
began to confront discrepancies between expectations and on-site realities. According to Maddux
(1991), the self-efficacy perspective assumes that,
People become distressed, unhappy, or anxious, get into conflicts with other people, and
experience other emotional and behavioral problems in adjustment because they hold
inaccurate and unrealistic expectations about their own behavior and the behavior of
others, undervalue or overvalue certain outcomes or consequences, feel nothing can be
done to control important life events and achieve valued life goals, or feel incapable of
doing those things that might control events and obtain goals. (p. 65)
197
Participants demonstrated that they were able to negotiate and respond to the mismatches
between expectations and realities by refining some of their unmet expectations, and consistently
remaining focused on clear academic and career goals. They were competent individuals who
understood how to set and achieve goals. Furthermore, participants’ likelihood of persisting was
enhanced by their abilities to select effective coping strategies that helped them managed
particularly challenging situations.
In general, findings of this study corroborate with existing studies. As reported by
Zajacova, Lynch, and Espenshade (2005), academic self-efficacy is the single strongest predictor
of freshman GPA for nontraditional and minority student populations in the United States.
Additionally, Duckworth et al. (2007) commented that whilst grit is not a good predictor of first-
year GPA, grit is however, predictive of students who persevere through the very limits of
physical, emotional, and mental capacities to complete their programs. Their studies reported
that: (1) grit was a positive predictor of students’ retention, (2) grittier students had higher
cumulative GPAs than students with lower grit scores, and (3) grittier students were more likely
to complete their programs (Duckworth et al., 2007). In a recent study that examined grit in a
collectivist culture (i.e., the Philippines), Datu, Valdez, and King (2016) found that the
“perseverance of effort” dimension of the two-factor model of grit proposed by Duckworth et al.
(2007) was applicable to Pilipino undergraduate students. In other words, Pilipino students who
exerted considerable effort in confronting challenges were associated with emotional well-being
and positive academic outcomes. Participants shared narratives about other SEA Malay students
who did not complete their study abroad programs due to two closely related concepts i.e., poor
academic performance, and depression. According to the participants, a majority of these
students dropped out before the start of the second year of their programs. It also appeared that
198
failures to meet high expectations of grades were detrimental to the emotional and mental
wellbeing of SEA Malay students. In consequence, lack of grit prompted them to eventually stop
trying.
Religious commitment. The role of religious beliefs and the extent to which they
influence a student’s life varies according to his or her level of religious commitment (Astin,
Astin, & Lindholm, 2010). A 2012 report based on more than 38,000 face-to-face interviews
with Muslims in 39 countries revealed that the attitudes of Muslims toward religion are
influenced by their age and level of education (Pew Research Center, 2012). The report posited
that younger (i.e., ages 18-34) and more highly educated (i.e., secondary education or more)
Muslims place significantly less importance on religion than their older and less educated
counterparts. Out of all the 39 countries surveyed, only Russia had more younger Muslims who
said that religion was more integral to their lives (Pew Research Center, 2012). By contrast, all
participants in this study are aged 26 years old or younger and illustrated that religion was
important in their daily lives studying abroad. Although participants indicated strong desires to
fit in, they did not feel that sacrificing their Islamic identity and beliefs was worth their peers’
acceptance.
For example, participants chose not to partake in the drinking culture that is prevalent in
the social interactions on campus. The consumption of alcohol is strictly forbidden in Islam and
participants viewed this prohibition as an important symbol of their Malay-Muslim identity.
Moreover, Islam forbids its followers from producing, preparing, carrying, purchasing, serving,
and selling alcoholic drinks. Because of this, participants were apathetic towards activities that
involved alcohol which created a significant barrier in their interactions with host country
students and faculty. On the other hand, in an extensive longitudinal study that surveyed 112,300
199
undergraduate freshmen at 236 public and private colleges in the United States in 2004, and then
followed up by surveys and interviews of 14,527 of these students at 136 institutions in 2007;
Astin, Astin, and Lindholm (2010) found that students’ level of religious commitment declined
significantly as they experienced college life which correlated strongly with alcohol consumption
and partying.
Previous studies that examined the social isolation of international students identified
conflicting cultural values as the main factor that caused international students to be isolated
from host country students (Chapdelaine & Alexitch, 2004; Erichsen & Bolliger, 2011; Junko
Maeda, 2017; Trice, 2007; Zhou, Frey, & Bang, 2011). One participant succinctly conveyed, “I
had a difficult time making friends with the locals. I think culture was a barrier; the drinking
culture.” Participants were looking forward to forming friendships with domestic students but
their unwillingness to navigate the drinking culture impeded attempts to build lasting
connections with more local students.
Theoretical Implications
The substantive model that emerged has several things in common with the conceptual
frameworks. Similar to existing models of student persistence and success (i.e., Spady, 1970;
Tinto, 1975, 1987, 1993; Bean, 1980, Pascarella, 1980; Astin, 1984; Bean & Metzner, 1985;
Cabrera, Nora, & Castaneda, 1993; Harper, 2012; Museus, 2014), the substantive Model of The
Persistence of SEA Malay Students corroborates the contributions of individual, social, and
institutional elements on students’ decisions to persist. For example, the model infers that
students’ pre-entry inputs, quality of student-faculty interactions, students’ involvement in
academic and social activities, academic performance, psychological wellbeing, commitment to
goals, and sense of belonging have direct and indirect significant impacts on Malay students’
200
persistence to degree completion. Likewise, this study questioned the applicability of early
theoretical models of students’ success such as Tinto’s (1975, 1987, 1993) to the experiences of
SEA Malay students studying abroad.
Museus’ (2014) CECE model identified nine specific indicators of culturally relevant and
responsive campus environments that can foster success amongst racially and ethnically diverse
students. Museus (2014) argued that rather than blame students from racially and ethnically
diverse groups for failing to assimilate into their college systems, institutions should be
scrutinized for their ineptitude in responding to the needs of racially and ethnically diverse
student populations. The CECE model was particularly useful as a conceptual framework to
collect, analyze, and synthesize data on the impacts that culturally relevant and culturally
responsive institutions have on participants’ persistence. Participants were asked questions to
illustrate the extent to which their institutions demonstrated cultural relevancy and
responsiveness to diverse student populations.
As mentioned earlier, this study revealed that seven of the nine primary indicators of
Museus’ (2014) CECE model fit my study well and were mentioned numerous times by
participants: (1) cultural familiarity, (2) culturally validating environments, (3) collectivist
cultural orientations, (4) humanized education environments, (5) opportunities for meaningful
cross-cultural engagement, (6) proactive philosophies, and (7) availability of holistic support.
The two other indicators i.e., culturally relevant knowledge, and cultural community service,
were mentioned only once by two separate participants which suggest that these indicators may
have less significant impacts on SEA Malay students’ persistence when studying abroad.
Although Creswell (2013) advised researchers against generalizing the findings of
qualitative studies, other scholars argued that it is important to consider and discuss the
201
transferability and generalizability of qualitative research findings (Glaser, 1998; Malterud,
2001; Silverman, 2011). The substantive model I constructed in this study was developed on a
single population of inquiry i.e., Southeast Asian Malay students studying abroad in the United
Kingdom, Australia, the United States, and New Zealand. Nevertheless, the range of application
of the study’s findings can be transferred and generalized to other Malay students who are
enrolled in higher education institutions in other substantive groups of the GLOBE world culture
particularly in countries that are grouped under Nordic Europe, Germanic Europe, Latin Europe,
Eastern Europe, and Latin America.
Recommendations for Future Research
The following sections summarize several directions for future research that: (1) build
upon the findings, (2) address the limitations, (3) expand the theoretical model by replicating this
same study in another ethnoreligious context, and (4) re-assess and confirm the developed
theoretical model.
First, future research can focus on further exploring the struggles and failures of SEA
Malay students in clinical placement contexts. Findings of this study revealed circumstances that
were detrimental to participants’ persistence levels when undertaking clinical placements that
include: (1) burnout and mental stress, (2) poor supervisory relationship, (3) cultural bias, and (4)
difficulty adjusting to the work environment. As highlighted by Davenport et al. (2018), existing
research on students’ difficulties in clinical contexts had only given voice to one side of the
clinical supervisor-student interactions i.e., from the perspectives of clinical supervisors.
Although this study yielded rich qualitative data that allowed me to gain a deep understanding of
the challenges that participants encountered during clinical placements, the number participants
that I interviewed who actually undertook clinical placements i.e., six, will be viewed by many
202
as small. Therefore, I recommend future research to include the student voice, especially the
viewpoints of ethnic and racial minority students, when aiming to investigate the struggles and
failures of students undertaking clinical placements. This would add other insights,
interpretations, and stimulate further thinking around unique clinical placement issues that affect
diverse and minority student populations. Future research that explore alternative models of
clinical placements would also be useful for developing strategies to improve the learning
experiences and outcomes of students during clinical placements. Similarly, future research that
seeks to understand cultural barriers to positive clinical supervisory relationships would benefit
minority students’ success and enhance the desired outcomes of clinical placements.
Another recommendation for future researchers is to consider utilizing Astin’s (1984)
Involvement Theory and Astin’s (1991) Input-Environment-Output (I-E-O) Model as theoretical
lenses to explore the impact of student involvement in influencing the persistence of ethnic and
racial minority students. In addition to student attributes and institutional characteristics, findings
of this study suggest that the amount and quality of participants’ involvement and participants’
interactions with their learning environments had significant impacts on their sense of belonging,
academic performance, mental and emotional wellbeing, and decisions to persist to degree
completion. These elements of involvement can be classified into two main categories: (1)
student-student interactions in campus residences, group projects, campus clubs, societies, and
student organizations, and (2) student-faculty interactions in academic, social, and clinical
placement settings. Thus, consistent with Astin’s (1984) Theory of Involvement, data indicated
that SEA Malay students are more likely to persist to graduation if they are more involved in the
academic and social activities of their institutions. Furthermore, as emphasized by Astin’s (1991)
I-E-O model, participants who were enrolled in healthcare programs were not only confined to
203
formal learning in classrooms on campus. In fact, they also came into contact with clinical
environments in hospitals and medical centers. Although the model developed as the result of
this study is similar to Astin’s (1984) Involvement Theory, the Model of The Persistence of
Southeast Asian Malay Students Studying Abroad recognizes two distinct features that were not
underlined by Astin (1984). These two prominent features i.e., cultural differences and the ways
students transition to higher education, will have significant impacts on students’ involvement in
higher education. Therefore, it is important for future researchers to take into consideration
interactions and environmental variables, like that of demanding practice environments of
hospitals and medical centers, when exploring minority student persistence in clinical placement
situations. Learning environments that provide adequate and equitable involvement in culturally
relevant and responsive manners would benefit diverse student populations in higher education.
Second, future research can address the sampling limitation of this study. One of the
limitations of the theoretical model developed by this study involves the use of purposeful
theoretical sampling to select the sample population. Due to time, logistical, and financial
reasons, as well as a means of securing ethical backing, I established an inclusion criterion at the
outset of the study which is based upon the research question i.e., I purposively limited the
study’s population sample to Malay participants from Brunei. Therefore, future research can
include a more extensive sampling population that systematically involves SEA Malays from
Brunei, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, and Thailand. Furthermore, the sample comprised
eighteen participants who graduated from the United Kingdom, eight participants from Australia,
two from the United States, and one from New Zealand. Although the size of the sample
population is sufficient for a grounded theory study i.e., data provided adequate richness and
depth to reach a point of theoretical saturation; future research would benefit from increased
204
variability by having a more equally balanced number of participants who completed their
undergraduate programs in the United Kingdom, Australia, the United States, New Zealand, and
other countries. Increased variability could possibly explicate and refine the emerging theory by
adding greater diversity to the data and research findings.
Third, the same study can be replicated and constructed in other ethnoreligious contexts.
Future researchers would also benefit from the use of this study’s efforts to explore different or
other specific ethnoreligious populations. Perhaps the model developed by this study could be
further modified or expanded to enhance the generalizability of the theoretical themes presented
herein. The conceptual level of the Model of The Persistence of Southeast Asian Malay Students
Studying Abroad is also highly transferable to other Muslim ethnoreligious groups such as: (1)
the Afar people from Ethiopia and Djibouti, (2) the Bosniaks from Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Croatia, Montenegro, and Serbia, (3) the Goranis from Kosovo, Albania, and North Macedonia,
(4) the Hui people from the Zhongyuan region of China, (5) Syrian Turkmens from the northern
Euphrates, and (6) the Uighurs from the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region of China.
However, additional data may be gathered to explore the similarities and differences of the
theoretical themes and sub-themes of the model for different ethnoreligious groups.
Finally, quantitative approaches can be utilized by future researchers to test the Theory of
The Persistence of SEA Malay Students Studying Abroad. A particular strength of a grounded
theory is that it can “revised and updated as new knowledge is acquired” (Corbin & Strauss,
2015, p. 11). According to Velicer, Cumming, Fava, Rossi, Prochaska, and Johnson (2008),
theory testing serves a critical role in the modification or rejection of a theory and they suggested
using standardized effect size estimates to quantify the predictions of theoretical models.
Multivariate data modeling using path analysis can be utilized to investigate complex theoretical
205
models (Heck, 2016) by explaining variation in a dependent variable (i.e., academic
performance, mental health wellbeing, commitment to goals, and sense of belonging) and to
estimate the magnitude of both direct and indirect effects for each independent variable (i.e., pre-
entry inputs, transition factors, campus environment variables, and clinical placement and
internship environment variables). Furthermore, analyzing the path model would allow future
researchers to differentiate between causal and non-causal relationships between the different
variables of the theoretical model constructed by this study. Future researchers could test the
theoretical model against quantitative data and determine how well the empirical test of the
model conforms to the theoretical explanations (Heck, 2016).
Recommendations for Future Practice
Although there are so many things that can be considered for future practice, I will
discuss a prioritized set of two implications of the Theory of The Persistence of SEA Malay
Students Studying Abroad in terms of its practical utility to those in the substantive area of
student success. The following section summarizes key implications that are important for
clinical supervisors, faculty and student affairs professionals, and students themselves to
consider.
Implications for clinical placement. This study provides a rich and detailed description
of the type and level of stress, struggles, and failures that participants experienced in clinical
environments. The findings provide a better understanding of the clinical placement stressors
confronting international students in particular, Malay students from Southeast Asia. Educators
and clinical supervisors can use this information to develop new clinical instructional strategies,
evaluation, and assessment that promote more effective learning. For example, Tuttle and Horan
(2019) found that Australian physiotherapy students’ performance on clinical placement
206
improved significantly when a one-week targeted simulation-based learning activity was carried
out immediately before their first two clinical placements. They highlighted that students
benefited from prior simulation-based learning activity because it acted as a transition and a
refresher between formal classroom teaching and clinical placement.
Additionally, data revealed that clinical supervisors’ behaviors and actions contributed
significantly to participants’ clinical psychological distress. Therefore, there is a need for clinical
supervisors to develop multicultural competence so they can be better equipped with managing
the clinical needs of diverse student populations. In this regard, the cultural proficiency of
clinical placement supervisors becomes a salient feature in shaping positive supervisory
relationships between SEA Malay students and their clinical supervisors. Institutions can
intervene by providing multicultural training workshops or courses that encourage clinical
supervisors to improve their interpersonal interactions and be culturally sensitive to students
whose backgrounds and experiences are significantly different from the mainstream culture. In
fact, multicultural training has been found to be impactful in enhancing positive cross-cultural
internship experiences (Paynter & Estrada, 2009). Such workshops or courses can also train
clinical supervisors to identify signs of psychological distress and improve their understanding of
appropriate responses, support, and guidance they can provide to students. Equally important are
the institutional actions and practices that seek to eliminate cultural prejudices and biases that
exist in the workplace. Last but not least, students can be assured that they can turn to their
personal tutors and faculty members for guidance, encouragement, and support.
Implications for faculty and student affairs. Given the findings of this study, it would
be useful for scholarship and funding organizations to conduct pre-departure workshops that
facilitate honest discussions about managing academic, social, and cultural expectations,
207
including how to prepare for unexpected realities once students arrive at their sojourn locations.
Harrison and Brower (2011) linked students with higher cultural intelligence i.e., those who
possess strong understanding about cultural differences and the motivation to adapt to a new
culture, with less homesickness and easier adjustments while studying abroad. Having said so,
institutions should not leave the responsibility of making academic, social, and cultural
adjustments in the hands of individual students.
Once on-site, institutions can continue to conduct orientation programs to facilitate social
transition. It is essential for institutions to keep themselves well informed about the different
kinds of support that different student populations need especially during the first year of their
programs. Institutions can play a more active role by providing relevant cultural courses that can
help international students develop a better understanding about the values, morals, customs, and
expectations of their host environment. Formal and informal workshops can help students gain
interpersonal communication skills and strategies to cope with transitional issues such as
depression, homesickness, loneliness, and dealing with cultural differences. At the same time,
institutions can look for better ways to increase positive interactions that can foster long lasting
friendships between domestic and international students. One approach is to maximize social
interactions by providing clear information on how to access and participate in student
organizations, campus clubs, societies, and extra-curricular activities that allow students from
different backgrounds and cultures to come together and share common interests. Beyond this, it
is integral for institutions to ensure that the housing and dietary needs of their first-time arriving
students are well accounted. The prevalence of mental health issues amongst minority students
would also require student affairs professionals and faculty to work together to provide holistic
support for psychologically distressed students.
208
Most importantly, I believe that institutions should focus on ensuring that their programs
and services are culturally relevant and culturally responsive to minoritized student groups.
Findings clearly show that cultural relevance and responsiveness are absolutely critical in
increasing the sense of belonging and ultimate success of SEA Malay students. Cultural
familiarity appeared to be the most prevalent theme mentioned by participants when they talked
about adjusting and adapting to the new cultures of their study abroad locations. It is worth
noting however, that participants highlighted an obvious underrepresentation of faculty from the
Southeast Asian Malay group across the universities that they were enrolled. Therefore, I
recommend that colleges and universities in the United Kingdom, Australia, and the United
States recruit and hire faculty from the SEA Malay population.
With regards to cultural validation, all participants indicated their desire to feel that their
cultural differences are acknowledged and valued by faculty and staff. One cultural aspect that
illustrate the compelling need for faculty and peers’ cultural sensitivity for SEA Malay students
is their strong reluctance to engage in activities that involve the consumption of alcohol. Hence,
information that explain the cultural and religious disparities that exist between minority and
mainstream cultures on campus would be useful in reducing cultural misunderstandings,
facilitating engagement across differences, and providing holistic support that meets the needs of
SEA Malay students. In classrooms, faculty can provide intentional emphases on collectivist
cultural orientated teaching and learning such as incorporating group assignments and team-
based projects that are conducive to fostering collaborative interactions. Finally, expanding
opportunities for meaningful cross-cultural engagement like inter-cultural and inter-faith
dialogues would be highly impactful in creating an environment for inclusion.
209
Conclusion
This study contributes to the gap in the literature by providing the most comprehensive
understanding of the process of persisting to degree completion for international Malay students
from Southeast Asia. A substantive grounded theory approach (Creswell, 2013) that used the
basic principles of an evolved grounded theory analysis laid out by Corbin and Strauss (2015)
was conducted to gather context-specific data and generate the theoretical model. Data analyses
led to the discovery of concepts and the emergence of four spatiotemporal stages of persisting to
degree completion that SEA Malay students go through when they study abroad, including Pre-
departure, Transition, Institution and Program, and Outcome.
The Model of the Persistence of Southeast Asia Malay Students Studying Abroad
developed by this study articulates support for and an extension of Museus’ (2014) CECE model.
Findings of this study support initial predictions and strengthen the existing scholarship on
student persistence and student success. Participants invested considerable time and effort in
preparing, adapting, learning, developing, and applying themselves to new academic, social, and
cultural environments of the institutions and countries they were sojourning. They experienced
inherently intertwined challenges and stressors as well as complex emotional processes that
affected their persistence levels. More importantly, this study established clear links between
students’ persistence processes and institutional practices of cultural relevance and cultural
responsiveness in explaining the success of SEA Malay students in higher education programs
abroad.
Moving forward, colleges and universities will benefit by committing to the
understanding of the complexities of campus climates and campus cultures from the perspectives
and experiences of diverse student populations and enhancing desired outcomes for all students.
210
The Model of The Persistence of Southeast Asian Malay Students Studying Abroad can help
higher education institutions across GLOBE culture groups to be more effective in engaging and
retaining Malay students from Southeast Asia.
211
APPENDIX A: AGREEMENT TO PARTICIPATE
University of Hawaiʻi, Mānoa
Consent to Participate in a Ph.D. Research
Interview title: The persistence of Southeast Asian Malay students studying in higher
education institutions abroad
Saiful Rizal Marali, Ph.D. in Educational Administration with Specialization in Higher
Education, Fall 2018
Hello! My name is Saiful Rizal Marali and you are invited to take part in an interview for a
Ph.D. research: A study of the persistence of Southeast Asian Malay students studying in higher
education institutions abroad. I am conducting this research as part of the requirements of my
Ph.D. program. The purpose of my interviews is to understand why and how Malay students
from Southeast Asia persist to degree completion despite the challenges they faced as
international students abroad. I am asking you to participate because you have recently graduated
from an institution of higher education in the United States/United Kingdom/Australia or have
continued your academic enrolment from semester-to-semester for at least four
semesters/quarters/units in your institution in United States/United Kingdom/Australia.
Activities and Time Commitment: If you participate in this research, I will meet with you for
an interview(s) at a location and time convenient for you. The interview will consist of 20 to 25
questions about your experiences before and during your time attending your undergraduate
degree program at your higher education institution. It will take approximately 45-90 minutes to
complete the interview. You may also be asked to participate in a follow-up interview of
approximately 3 to 6 additional questions.
Only you and I will be present during the interview. With your permission, I will audio-record
the interview so that I can later transcribe the interview and analyze the responses. You will be
one of about thirty participants that I will be interviewing for this research. I will invite you to
review the interview transcript to confirm whether the transcript validated the messages you
wanted to convey. Data collected from the interview will be kept strictly confidential.
Benefits and Risks: You will receive BND20.00 for participating in this interview if the
interview session goes beyond one hour to complete and BND10.00 if the session takes less than
one hour. The results of this study may help other Malay students to persist in their higher
education programs abroad. The findings will portray the persistence behaviors of Malay
students. I believe there is little risk to you for participating in this research. You may become
stressed or uncomfortable answering any of the interview questions or discussing topics with me
during the interview. If you do become stressed or uncomfortable, you can skip the question or
take a break. You can also stop the interview, or you can withdraw from the interview altogether
at any time.
Privacy and Confidentiality: I will keep all study data secure in a locked filing cabinet at my
home and encrypted on a password protected computer. I will transcribe the interview and bring
it to my university or office to analyze. Only my Ph.D. committee Chair, Dr. Chris Lucas, my
four Ph.D. committee members, appropriate oversight staff at the Institutional Review Board’s
212
Committee on Human Subjects, and I will see the interview transcripts. I will use pseudonyms
(alternative names) on the transcript and will report my findings in a way that protects your
privacy and confidentiality to the extent allowed by law.
After I transcribe the interviews, I will erase or destroy the audio-recordings. On the transcripts
and when I report the results of research, I will not use your name. I will not use any other
personal identifying information that can identify you.
Voluntary Participation: Your participation in this interview is completely voluntary. You may
stop participating at any time. If you choose to stop participating, there will be no penalty or loss
to you.
Questions: If you have any questions about this interview, please call or email me at [+673
8722321, +18084949397, [email protected]]. You may also contact my PhD. Committee
Chair, Dr. Chris Lucas, at +18089564119 or via email (). You may also contact the UH Human
Studies Program at 808.956.5007 or to discuss problems, concerns and questions; obtain
information; or offer input with an informed individual who is unaffiliated with the specific
research protocol. Please visit https://www,hawaii.edu/researchcompliance/information-
research-participants for more information on your rights as a research participant.
213
University of Hawaiʻi, Mānoa
Consent to Participate in a Ph.D. Research Interview
Interview title: A study of the persistence of Southeast Asian Malay students who are
enrolled in higher education institutions in the United States, the United Kingdom, and
Australia.
Saiful Rizal Marali
Ph.D. in Educational Administration with Specialization in Higher Education,
Fall 2018
If you agree to participate in this project, please sign and date this signature page and return it to
Saiful Rizal Marali.
Please keep the previous page for your records.
Signature(s) for Consent:
I give permission to be interviewed for the research: A study of the persistence of Southeast
Asian Malay students who are enrolled in higher education institutions in the United States, the
United Kingdom, and Australia.
Please initial next to either “Yes” or “No” to the following:
_____ Yes _____ No I consent to be audio-recorded for the interviews.
Name of Participant
(Print):_______________________________________________________________________
__
Participant’s Signature: _____________________________________________
Signature of the Person Obtaining Consent:
___________________________________
Date: ____________________________
Thank you!
214
APPENDIX B: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
Study: The persistence of Southeast Asian Malay students studying in higher education
institutions abroad.
Time of Interview:
Date:
Place:
Interviewer:
Interviewee:
To share with participant prior to the start of the interview:
• Introduction to researcher and study (via consent form).
• Thanking the participant.
• Noting that the plan is to interview 30 participants and to report them as pseudonyms.
• Emphasize that the researcher is exploring the process of Malay students studying and
completing a program at the UK, Australia, or USA – and that there are no “right” or
“wrong” answers, and that their responses will be valuable for the study.
• Share that the study will present a model of Malay student success and a secondary
goal is to positively impact practice at the various sites.
Interview questions:
1) Think back to the process of selecting the country and the institution where you studied
abroad.
a. Please describe this process in as much detail as you can remember.
b. What country did you select? And, why?
c. What institution did you select? And, why?
d. What were your initial expectations about a study abroad experience?
2) Describe the initial few weeks once you had arrived at the new institution.
a. How did you feel during these first weeks?
b. Did this or these feelings change over time? If yes, how so?
3) If you consider the entire time that you are/were a student at the new institution, how
would you describe it?
a. What has been positive at the new institution?
i. How did you respond to the positive situations?
b. What has been less positive or negative at the new institution?
i. How did you respond to the negative situations?
215
4) What were the most helpful actions that the institution did for you?
a. How did you respond to these most helpful actions?
5) What were the least helpful actions that the institution did or did not do for you?
a. How did you respond to these least helpful actions?
6) Why have you or did you choose to remain enrolled and to complete the program?
a. Why did you continue and graduate?
7) Please describe any academic challenges that you faced while in the program.
8) Please describe any non-academic challenges that you faced while in the program.
9) Academically, are you or did you achieve your goals?
a. If yes, what were those goals?
b. If no, why not?
10) Did you achieve any other personal goals that are or were not related to academics during
the program?
a. If yes, what were these goals?
b. If no, why not?
11) Think about your own strengths. How might these have impacted you in your studies?
12) Think about your own limitations. How might these have impacted you in your studies?
13) Discuss the secondary education preparation you received.
a. Did you feel prepared academically for the study abroad program? Why or why
not?
14) What role(s) did your family have during your time studying abroad?
15) What role(s) did close friends have during your time studying abroad?
16) What role(s) did faculty have during your time studying abroad?
17) How would you describe a typical Malay college student?
a. How does this description compare to you?
18) How would you describe the Malay culture overall?
a. What is valued in the Malay culture? Or, what is most important?
b. What behaviors or skills are emphasized in the Malay culture?
19) How would you describe the culture overall at the UK / Australia / USA?
216
a. What is valued in that culture? Or, what is most important?
b. What skills or behaviors are emphasized in that culture?
20) How would you compare the Malay culture to that of the other country?
a. What is most different about the two cultures?
b. Did your expectations of the other country and institution match reality? Why or
why not?
21) What kind of things did your institution do to incorporate culturally relevant content in
your courses? [Note: At this point I will refer to Museus’ (2014) culturally engaging
campus environments model and provide some examples of the nine specific indicators
of campus environments identified by Museus (2014) that can foster success amongst
racially and ethnically diverse students: (1) cultural familiarity, (2) culturally relevant
knowledge, (3) cultural community service, (4) opportunities for meaningful cross-
cultural engagement, (5) collectivist cultural orientations, (6) culturally validating
environments, (7) humanized educational environments, (8) proactive philosophies, and
(9) availability of support]
a. How did your institution help students understand the cultural experiences of
different ethnic groups and nationalities?
22) Consider all international students who studied at the new institution.
a. What was common for most students?
b. Were there any differences in experiences for the various international students?
If so, what were they?
c. How did your own experiences compare with theirs?
23) Are you aware of Malay students who chose to not complete a study abroad program? If
so, can you please share information as to why?
24) What advice would you share with a future Malay student who is considering studying in
the UK / Australia / USA?
25) If you had the power to make immediate changes to the program, what would those
changes be? And, why?
26) If you had the opportunity to go back in time, would you still choose to study at the UK /
Australia / USA? Why or why not?
27) Any other comments you would like to share?
28) Any questions for me?
217
APPENDIX C: IRB APPROVAL
218
References
ABS (Australian Bureau of Statistics). (2011). International students. Retrieved from
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/Lookup/4102.0Main+Features20Dec+201
1
Abu-Arab, A., & Parry, A. (2015). Supervising culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD)
nursing students: A challenge for clinical educators. Nurse Education in Practice, 15(4),
E1-E9.
AHRC (Australian Human Rights Commission). (2010). Racism, exclusion and poverty: Key
factors reducing international student safety. Sydney, Australia: AHRC. Retrieved from
http://www.hreoc.gov.au/racial_discrimination/forum/20100412_racism_students.html
Akanwa, E. E. (2015). International students in western developed countries: History,
challenges, and prospects. Journal of International Students, 5(3), 271-284.
Alberts, H. C. (2007). Beyond the headlines: Changing patterns in international student
enrollment in the United States. GeoJournal, 68(2-3), 141-153.
Ali, I. (2017). Affirmative action for tertiary education in Malaysia. International Journal of
Economics, Commerce and Management, 5(3), 313-317.
Altbach, P. G. (2004). Higher education crosses borders: Can the United States remain the top
destination for foreign students? Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 36(2), 18-
25.
Altbach, P. G., & Knight, J. (2007). The internationalization of higher education: Motivations
and realities. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(3-4), 290-305.
Andrade, M. (2007). International student persistence: Integration or cultural integrity? Journal
of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 8(1), 57-81.
219
Andrade, M. (2008). International student persistence at a faith-based institution. Christian
Higher Education, 7(5), 434-451.
APEC Policy Support Unit (2017). The APEC women and the economy dashboard 2017.
APEC#217-SE-01.23 APEC Policy for Women and the Economy
Arambewela, R., & Hall, J. (2007). A model of student satisfaction: International postgraduate
students from Asia. ACR European Advances.
Astin, A. W. (1977). Four critical years. Effects of college on beliefs, attitudes, and knowledge.
Jossey-Bass Publishers, Inc
Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal
of College Student Personnel, 25, 297-308.
Astin, A. W. (1999). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal
of College Student Development, 40(5), 518-529.
Astin, A., Astin, H., & Lindholm, J. (2010). Cultivating the spirit how college can enhance
students’ inner lives. Jossey Bass Ltd.
Attrill, S., Lincoln, M., & Mcallister, S. (2012). Student diversity and implications for clinical
competency development amongst domestic and international speech-language pathology
students. International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 14(3), 260-270.
Attrill, S., Lincoln, M., & Mcallister, S. (2016). Supervising international students in clinical
placements: Perceptions of experiences and factors influencing competency development.
BMC Medical Education, 16(1), 180.
Aulck, L., Velagapudi, N., Blumenstock, J., & West, J. (2016). Predicting student dropout in
higher education. arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.06364.
220
Australian Government. (2011). Strategic review of the Student Visa Program 2011 [The Knight
Report]. Retrieved from http://www.immi.gov.au/students/_pdf/2011-knight-review.pdf
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2),
122–147.
Bandura, A. (1989). Regulation of cognitive processes through self-efficacy. Developmental
Psychology, 25(5), 729-735
Bandura, A., & Wood, R. (1989). Effect of perceived controllability and performance standards
on self-regulation of complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 56(5), 805–814.
Barkdull, C., Khaja, K., Queiro-Tajalli, I., Swart, A., Cunningham, D., & Dennis, S. (2011).
Experiences of Muslims in four Western countries post—9/11. Affilia, 26(2), 139-153.
Bean, J. P. (1980). Dropouts and turnover: The synthesis and test of a causal model of student
attrition. Research in Higher Education, 12(2), 155-187.
Bean, J. P. (1982). Conceptual models of student attrition: How theory can help the institutional
researcher. New Directions for Institutional Research, 1982(36), 17-33.
Bean, J. P., & Metzner, B.S. (1985). A conceptual model of nontraditional undergraduate student
attrition. Review of Educational Research, 55(4), 485-540.
Beer, C., & Lawson, C. (2017). The problem of student attrition in higher education: An
alternative perspective. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 41(6), 773-784.
Berger, Joseph B., & Braxton, John M. (1998). Revising Tinto's Interactionalist Theory of
Student Departure through theory elaboration: Examining the Role of Organizational
Attributes in the Persistence Process. Research in Higher Education, 39(2), 103-19.
221
Berry, S., LaGreca, A., & Bruynzeel, P. (2018). Using data & texting to increase retention: A
success story at the Oregon Tech Institute of Technology. Retrieved from
https://mcsl.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Millennium-Oregon-Tech-Case-Study.pdf
Bers, T.H. & Smith, K.E. (1991). Persistence of community college students: The influence of
student intent and academic and social integration. Research in Higher Education 32(5),
539–556.
Booker, K., & Brevard Jr, E. (2017). Why mentoring matters: African American Students and
the transition to college. The Mentor: Innovative Scholarship on Academic Advising, 19.
Braxton, J. M., Hirschy, A. S., & McClendon, S. A. (2004). Toward understanding and reducing
college student departure. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Research Report Series (No.
30).
Braxton, J. & McClendon, S. (2001). The fostering of social integration and retention through
institutional practice. College Student Retention: Research, Theory and Practice, 3, 57-
71.
Breckenridge, J., & Jones, D. (2009). Demystifying theoretical sampling in grounded theory
research. Grounded Theory Review, 8(2).
Brunei Department of Statistics (2017). Brunei Darussalam key indicators 2016. Brunei:
Perpustakaan Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka Brunei.
Cabán-Alemán C., King J., Padilla A., & Tse J. (2019). Teaching cultural humility:
Understanding others by reflecting on ourselves. In: Foster A., Yaseen Z. (eds)
Teaching Empathy in Healthcare (pp. 179-191). Springer, Cham
Cabrera, A., Castañeda, M., Nora, A., & Hengstler, D. (1992). The convergence between two
theories of college persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 63(2), 143-164.
222
Cabrera, A. F., Nora, A., & Castañeda, M. B. (1993). College persistence: Structural equations
modeling test of an integrated model of student retention. The Journal of Higher
Education, 64(2), 123-139.
Chapdelaine, R. F., & Alexitch, L. R. (2004). Social skills difficulty: Model of culture shock for
international graduate students. Journal of College Student Development, 45(2), 167-184.
Charmaz, K. (2003). Qualitative interviewing and grounded theory analysis. In J. H. Holstein &
J. F. Gubrium (Eds.), Inside interviewing: New lenses, new concerns (pp.311-330).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative
research. Sage Publications Ltd, London.
Chen, R. R. (2012). Institutional characteristics and college student dropout risks: A multilevel
event history analysis. Research in Higher Education, 53(5), 487-505.
doi:10.1007/s11162-011-9241-4
Chipchase, L., Davidson, M., Blackstock, F., Bye, R., Colthier, P., Krupp, N., Dickson, W.,
Turner, D., & Williams, M. (2017). Conceptualising and measuring student
disengagement in higher education: A synthesis of the literature. International Journal of
Higher Education, 6(2), 31–42.
College Board (n.d.) Average published charges, 2018-19 and 2019-20 Retrieved from
https://research.collegeboard.org/trends/college-pricing/figures-tables/average-published-
charges-2018-19-and-2019-20
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2015). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory. Sage Publications.
223
Cotton, D. R., Nash, T., & Kneale, P. (2017). Supporting the retention of non-traditional students
in Higher Education using a resilience framework. European Educational Research
Journal, 16(1), 62-79.
Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches
(3rd ed.). Los Angeles: SAGE Publications.
Currie, K., McCallum, J., Murray, J., Scott, J., Strachan, E., Yates, L., & Wright, M. (2014)
Developing a national computerised absence monitoring and management system to
reduce nursing student attrition: Evaluation of staff and student perspectives. Nurse
Education Today, 34(5), 738-743.
Day, A., Nakata, V., Nakata, M., & Martin, G. (2015). Indigenous students' persistence in higher
education in Australia: contextualising models of change from psychology to understand
and aid students' practices at a cultural interface. Higher Education Research &
Development, 34(3), 501-512.
Davenport, R., Hewat, S., Ferguson, A., McAllister, S., & Lincoln, M. (2018). Struggle and
failure on clinical placement: A critical narrative review. International Journal of
Language & Communication Disorders, 53(2), 218-227.
Datu, J., Valdez, J., & King, R. (2016). Perseverance counts but consistency does not! Validating
the short grit scale in a collectivist setting. Current Psychology, 35(1), 121–130.
Diaz, T., Navarro, J., & Chen, E. (2019). An institutional approach to fostering inclusion and
addressing racial bias: Implications for diversity in academic medicine. Teaching and
Learning in Medicine, 32(1), 1-7.
224
D’Lima, G. M., Winsler, A., & Kitsantas, A. (2014). Ethnic and gender differences in first-year
college students’ goal orientation, self-efficacy, and extrinsic and intrinsic motivation.
The Journal of Educational Research, 107(5), 341-356.
Draucker, C., Martsolf, D., Ross, R., & Rusk, T. (2007). Theoretical sampling and category
development in grounded theory. Qualitative Health Research, 17(8), 1137-1148.
Douglas, C., & Jones-Rikkers, C. G. (2001). Study abroad programs and American student world
mindedness: An empirical analysis. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 13(1),
55-66.
Dunn, K. M., Klocker, N., & Salabay, T. (2007). Contemporary racism and Islamophobia in
Australia: Racializing religion. Ethnicities, 7(4), 564-589.
Durkheim, E. (1951). Suicide: A study in sociology. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
Duckworth, A. L, Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and
passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(6), 1087-
1101.
Erichsen, E., & Bolliger, D. (2011). Towards understanding international graduate student
isolation in traditional and online environments. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 59(3), 309-326.
Evans, C. (2006). The experience of international doctoral education in nursing: an exploratory
survey of staff and international nursing students in a British university, Nurse Education
Today, 27, 499-505.
Farrugia, C., & Villarreal, A. (2015). International student mobility in the United States.
International Higher Education, 71, 13-15.
225
Fassinger, R. E. (2005). Paradigms, praxis, problems, and promise: Grounded theory in
counseling psychology research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 156.
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. London: Weidenfeld and
Nicholson, 24(25), 288-304.
Glaser, B. G. (1998). Doing grounded theory: Issues and discussions. Mill Valley, CA:
Sociology Press.
Gloria, A. M., Castellanos, J., Lopez, A. G., & Rosales, R. (2005). An examination of academic
nonpersistence decisions of Latino undergraduates. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral
Sciences, 27, 202–223.
Godor, Brian P. (2017). Academic fatalism: Applying Durkheim's fatalistic suicide yypology to
student drop-out and the climate of higher education. Interchange: A Quarterly Review of
Education, 48(3), 257-269.
Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research:
concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education Today,
24(2), 105-112.
Grebennikov, L., & Shah, M. (2012). Investigating attrition trends in order to improve student
retention. Quality Assurance in Education, 20(3), 223-236.
Grebennikov, L. & Skaines, I. (2008). University of Western Sydney students at risk: profile and
opportunities for change. Journal of Institutional Research, 14(1), 58-70.
Fischer, J. (2005). Feeding secularism: Consuming halal among the Malays in London.
Diaspora: A Journal of Transnational Studies, 14(2), 275-297.
FitzGerald, C., & Hurst, S. (2017). Implicit bias in healthcare professionals: a systematic
review. BMC Medical Ethics, 18(1), 19.
226
Habley, Wesley R, Bloom, Jennifer L, & Robbins, Steven B. (2012). Increasing Persistence:
Research-based Strategies for College Student Success (First ed.). Jossey Bass.
Hagedorn, L.S. (2012). How to define retention. In Seidman, A., Astin, Alexander, Berger,
Joseph, Bibo, Erin, Burkum, Kurt, Cabrera, Alberto, . . . Tinto, Vincent. (2012). College
student retention: Formula for student success (Second ed.), American Council on
Education series on higher education (2009).
Haiwen, Y., Steven, H., Cleborne, M., & Marlowe, S. (2006). The impact of cross- cultural
experiences on worldviews of Chinese international students. Counseling & Values,
51(1), 21-38.
Hallett, C. (2011). Introduction. In: UK Council for International Student Affairs (UKCISA).
PMI student experience achievements 2006-2011. London: UKCISA, pp. 1-2. Harper, S.
R., & Hurtado, S. (2007). Nine themes in campus racial climates. In S. R. Harper & L.D.
Patton (Eds.), Responding to the realities of race on campus: New Directions for Student
Services (pp. 7-24). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hamshire, C., Willgoss, T., & Wibberley, C. (2013). Should I stay or should I go? A study
exploring why healthcare students consider leaving their programme. Nurse Education
Today, 33(8), 889-895.
Hanassab, S. (2006). Diversity, international students, and perceived discrimination: Implications
for educators and counselor. Journal of Studies in International Education, 10(2), 157-
172.
Harrison, J., & Brower, H. (2011). The impact of cultural intelligence and psychological
hardiness on homesickness among study abroad students. Frontiers: The
Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad, 21, 41–62
227
Hayes, R. L., & Lin, H-R. (1994). Coming to America: Developing social support systems for
international students. Journal of Multicultural Counseling & Development, 10(2), 157-
172.
Heath, H., & Cowley, S. (2004). Developing a grounded theory approach: A comparison of
Glaser and Strauss. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 41(2), 141-150.
Heck, R. (2016). Working with Path Model. In Ron Heck (Eds.), Course Reader Introduction to
Multivariate Analysis (pp. 22-43). Curriculum Research & Development Group:
University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa, College of Education.
Henderson, S., Horne, M., Hills, R., & Kendall, E. (2018). Cultural competence in healthcare in
the community: a concept analysis. Health & Social Care in the Community, 26(4), 590-
603.
HESA (n.d.) Non-continuation: UK performance indicators 2016/17. Higher Education Statistics
Agency, United Kingdom. Accessed from https://www.hesa.ac.uk/news/08-03-2018/non-
continuation-tables
Hoffa, W. W. (2007). Ethics and Study Abroad. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 54(2).
Hofstede, G.H., Hofstede, G.K., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of
the mind: Intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival (3rd ed.). New York,
NY: McGraw-Hill.
House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (Eds.). (2004). Culture,
leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Sage publications.
Hulleman, C. S., Schrager, S. M., Bodmann, S. M., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2010). A meta-
analytic review of achievement goal measures: Different labels for the same constructs or
different constructs with similar labels? Psychological Bulletin, 136(3), 422.
228
Hurtado, S., & Carter, D. (1997). Effects of college transition and perceptions of the campus
racial climate on Latina/o college students’ sense of belonging. Sociology of
Education,70, 324-345.
IIE (Institute for International Education) (2006), Data on US international education Retrieved
from http://open doors. ii enetwork.org/?p=6973 6
IIE (Institute of International Education). (2014). Project Atlas: Atlas of student mobility –
United Kingdom
Ingraham, E. C., & Peterson, D. L. (2004). Assessing the impact of study abroad on student
learning at Michigan State University. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study
Abroad, 10, 83-100.
James, R., Krause, K., & Jennings, C. (2010). The first-year experience in Australian
universities: Findings from 1994 to 2009. Centre for the study of Higher Education. The
University of Melbourne.
Jayakumar, U. M., & Museus, S. D. (2012). Mapping the intersection of campus cultures and
equitable outcomes among racially diverse student populations. Creating campus
cultures: Fostering success among racially diverse student populations, 1-27.
Junko Maeda. (2017). Self-Efficacy Reduces Impediments to Classroom Discussion for
International Students: Fear, Embarrassment, Social Isolation, Judgment, and
Discrimination. IAFOR Journal of Education, 5(2), 141–159.
Lee, J. J. (2010). International students’ experiences and attitudes at a U.S. host institution: Self-
reports and future recommendations. Journal of Research in International Education,
9(1), 66-84.
229
Lee, J. J., & Rice, C. (2007). Welcome to America? International student perceptions of
discrimination. Higher Education, 53(3), 381-409.
Lee, L. (2012). Engaging study abroad students in intercultural learning through blogging and
ethnographic interviews. Foreign Language Annals, 45(1), 7-21.
Lindsey, R. (2008). Culturally proficient inquiry: a lens for identifying and examining
educational gaps. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Lyubomirsky, S., Sheldon, K. M., & Schkade, D. (2005). Pursuing happiness: the architecture of
sustainable change. Review of General Psychology, 9(2), 111.
Kitsantas, A. (2004). Studying abroad: The role of college students’ goals on the development of
cross-cultural skills and global understanding. College Student Journal, 38(3), 441
Kluckhohn, F. R., & Strodtbeck, F. L. (1961). Variations in value orientations. (p. xiv + 437–xiv
+ 437). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/37735085/
Knight, J. (2003). Updating the definition of internationalization. International Higher
Education, 33(6), 2-3.
Knight, J. (2004). Internationalisation remodeled: definitions, approaches, and rationales.
Journal of Studies in International Education, 8(1), 5-31.
Krause, K., Hartley, R., James, R. and Mclnnis, C. (2005). The first-year experience in
Australian universities: findings from a decade of national studies. Retrieved from
www.dest.gov.au/sectors/ higher_
education/publications_resources/profiles/first_year_experience.htm
Kuh, G., Kinzie, J., Schuh, H. and Whitt, E. (2005). Student success in college: Creating
condition that matter. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
230
Maddux, J.E. (1991). Self-Efficacy. In Snyder, C.R. & Donelson R. Forsyth (Eds.), Handbook of
social and clinical psychology: The health perspective (pp. 57-78). Pergamon General
Psychology Series. Pergamon Press. Retrieved from
https://scholarship.richmond.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1167&context=bookshelf
Malmgren, J., & Galvin, J. (2008). Effects of study abroad participation on student graduation
rates: A study of three incoming freshman cohorts at the University of Minnesota, Twin
Cities. NACADA Journal, 28(1), 29-42.
Malterud, K. (2001). Qualitative research: standards, challenges, and guidelines. The Lancet, 358
(9280), 483-488.
Mannan, Md. Abdul. (2007). Student attrition and academic and social integration: Application
of Tinto's Mmodel at the University of Papua New Guinea. Higher Education: The
International Journal of Higher Education and Educational Planning, 53(2), 147-165.
Maramba, D., & Palmer, R. (2014). The impact of cultural validation on the college experiences
of Southeast Asian American students. Journal of College Student Development, 55(6),
515–530.
María Cubillo, J., Sánchez, J., & Cerviño, J. (2006). International students' decision-making
process. International Journal of Educational Management, 20(2), 101-115.
Martinez, P. (2006). Muslim Identities Public Opinion Survey, Peninsular Malaysia. Kuala
Lumpur: Asia-Europe Institute, University of Malaya.
Maxwell, J. A. (1992). Understanding and validity in qualitative research. In A. M. Huberman &
M. B. Miles (Eds.), The qualitative researcher’s companion. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Maxwell, J. A. (2004). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (2nd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage.
231
Mazzarol, T., & Soutar, G. N. (2002). “Push-pull” factors influencing international student
destination choice. International Journal of Educational Management, 16(2), 82-90.
Mclachlan, D. A., & Justice, J. (2009). A grounded theory of international student well-
being. Journal of Theory Construction & Testing, 13(1), 27-32.
McQuaid, E. L., & Landier, W. (2018). Cultural issues in medication adherence: disparities and
directions. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 33(2), 200-206.
Miller, N. J. (2013). Strategic affinity: Engaging international alumni to support
internationalisation: A UK case study approach. Retrieved from
https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/system/files/resources/miller-report-final.pdf
Mikkonen, K., Elo, S., Kuivila, H., Tuomikoski, A., & Kääriäinen, M. (2016). Culturally and
linguistically diverse healthcare students’ experiences of learning in a clinical
environment: A systematic review of qualitative studies. International Journal of Nursing
Studies, 54, 173-187.
Mohajeri Norris, E., & Gillespie, J. (2009). How study abroad shapes global careers: Evidence
from the United States. Journal of Studies in International Education, 13(3), 382-397.
Montgomery, C. (2010). Understanding the international student experience. Palgrave
Macmillan.
Murphy, D., Sahakyan, N., Yong-Yi, D., & Magnan, S. S. (2014). The impact of study abroad on
the global engagement of university graduates. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal
of Study Abroad, 24, 1-24.
Museus, S. D. (2007). Using qualitative methods to assess diverse institutional cultures. In S. R.
Harper, & S. D. Museus (Eds.), Using qualitative methods in institutional assessment
232
(New directions for institutional research, no. 136, pp. 29-40). San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Museus, S. D. (2014). The Culturally Engaging Campus Environments (CECE) model: A new
theory of success among racially diverse college student populations. In M. B. Paulsen
(Ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research (no. 29, pp. 189-227). New
York: Springer.
Museus, S. D., & Kiang, P. N. (2009). Deconstructing the model minority myth and how it
contributes to the invisible minority reality in higher education research. New Directions
for Institutional Research, 2009(142), 5-15.
Museus, S. D., & Maramba, D. C. (2010). The impact of culture on Filipino American students’
sense of belonging. Review of Higher Education, 34(2), 231-258.
Museus, S. D., & Quaye, S. J. (2009). Toward an intercultural perspective of racial and ethnic
minority college student persistence. Review of Higher Education, 33(1), 67-94.
Museus, S., Shiroma, K., & Dizon, J. (2016). Cultural community connections and college
success: An examination of Southeast Asian American college students. Journal of
College Student Development, 57(5), 485-502.
Museus, S., Zhang, D., & Kim, M. (2016). Developing and evaluating the Culturally Engaging
Campus Environments (CECE) scale: An Examination of content and construct
validity. Research in Higher Education, 57(6), 768–793.
Napoli, Anthony R., & Wortman, Paul M. (1998). Psychosocial factors related to retention and
early departure of two-year community colleges students. Research in Higher Education,
39(4), 419-56.
233
Nora, A. (1985). Determinants of retention among Chicano college students: A structural
model. Research in Higher Education, 26(1), 31-59.
Northouse, P. G. (2018). Leadership: Theory and practice. Sage publications.
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). (2011). Education at a
glance. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/skillsbeyond-
school/48631582.pdf
O'Keeffe, P. (2013). A sense of belonging: Improving student retention. College Student
Journal, 47(4), 605-613.
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Leech, N. L. (2007). Validity and qualitative research: An oxymoron?
Quality & Quantity, 41, 233 − 249.
O’Reilly, M., & Parker, N. (2013). Unsatisfactory Saturation: A critical exploration of the notion
of saturated sample sizes in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 13(2), 190-197.
doi 10.1177/146879411244610
Pascarella, E. T. (1980). Student-faculty informal contact and college outcomes. Review of
Educational Research, 50(4), 545-595.
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1977). Patterns of student-faculty informal interaction
beyond the classroom and voluntary freshman attrition. The Journal of Higher
Education, 48(5), 540-552.
Pascarella, E.T. & Terenzini, P.T. (1978). The Role of students’ background and levels of
academic and social integration in college attrition: A test of a model. Paper presented to
the Annual Conference of American Education Research Association, Toronto, Canada,
March.
234
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1979). Student-faculty informal contact and college
persistence: A further investigation. The Journal of Educational Research, 72(4), 214-
218.
Pascarella, E.T. & Terenzini, P.T. (1979). Interaction effects in Spady’s and Tinto’s conceptual
models of college dropout. Sociology of Education, 52(October), 197-210.
Pascarella, E.T. & Terenzini, P.T. (1980). Predicting first year persistence and voluntary dropout
decisions from a Theoretical Model. The Journal of Higher Education, 51(1), 60-74.
Pascarella, E.T., Smart, J.C. & Ethington, C.A. (1986). Long-term persistence of two-year
college students. Research in Higher Education, 24(1), 47-71.
Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students, Volume 2: A third
decade of research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Paynter, C., & Estrada, D. (2009). Multicultural training applied in clinical practice: reflections
from a Euro-American female counselor-in-training working with Mexican
immigrants. The Family Journal, 17(3), 213-219.
Pew Research Center (2012). The world’s Muslims: Unity and diversity. The Pew Forum on
Religion & Public Life. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/wp-
content/uploads/sites/7/2012/08/the-worlds-muslims-full-report.pdf
Phelan, W. T. (1979). Undergraduate orientations toward scientific and scholarly careers.
American Educational Research Journal, 16(4), 411-422.
Poole, P. A. (2009). Politics and society in Southeast Asia. McFarland.
Poyrazli, S., & Grahame, K. M. (2007). Barriers to adjustment: Needs of international students
within a semi-urban campus community. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 34(1), 28-
45.
235
Project Atlas. (2017). International Students Data. Retrieved from https://www.iie.org/Research-
and-Insights/Open-Doors/Data/International-Students
Rankin, S. R., & Reason, R. D. (2005). Differing perceptions: How students of color and White
students perceive campus climate for underserved groups. Journal of College Student
Development, 46(1), 43-61.
Reilly, A. (2012). Protecting vulnerable migrant workers: The case of international students.
Australian Journal of Labour Law, 25(3), 181-208.
Rendón, L. I. (1994). Validating culturally diverse students: Toward a new model of learning and
student development. Innovative Higher Education, 19(1), 33-51.
Rendón, L. I., Jalomo, R. E., & Nora, A. (2000). Theoretical considerations in the study of
minority student retention in higher education. In J. Braxton (Ed.), Reworking the student
departure puzzle (pp. 127-156). Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.
Rendón, L. I., & Muñoz, S. M. (2011). Revisiting validation theory: Theoretical foundations,
applications, and extensions. Enrollment Management Journal: Student Access, Finance,
and Success in Higher Education, 5(2), 12-33.
Rew, L., Becker, H., Cookston, J., Khosropour, S., & Martinez, S. (2003). Measuring cultural
awareness in nursing students. Journal of Nursing Education, 42(6), 249-57.
Rodgers, K. A. (2008). Racial identity, centrality and giftedness: An expectancy-value
application of motivation in gifted African American students. Roeper Review, 30(2),
111-120.
Rosenberg, M. S., Westling, D. L., & McLeskey, J. (2008). Special education for today's
teachers: An introduction. Pearson/Merill/Prentice Hall.
236
Rossmann, J. E. (1967). Student and faculty attitudes toward the interim term: An evaluation of
curricular innovation. Liberal Education, 53(1), 7.
Russell, J., Rosenthal, D., & Thomson, G. (2010). The international student experience: three
styles of adaptation. Higher Education, 60(2), 235-249
San Miguel, C., & Rogan, F. (2015). Assessing students' English language proficiency during
clinical placement: A qualitative evaluation of a language framework. Nurse Education
Today, 35(6), 771-776.
Schuh, J.H., & Gansemer-Topf, A. (2012) Finances and retention: Trends and potential
implications. In A. Seidman College student retention: Formula for student success
(Second ed.). American Council on Education series on higher education.
Seidman, A., Astin, Alexander, Berger, Joseph, Bibo, Erin, Burkum, Kurt, Cabrera, Alberto, . . .
Tinto, Vincent. (2012). College student retention: Formula for student success (Second
ed.). American Council on Education series on higher education.
Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction.
American Psychologist, 55(1), 5-14.
Silverman, D. (2011). Interpreting Qualitative Data, 4th Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Spady, W. G. (1970). Dropouts from higher education: An interdisciplinary review and
synthesis. Interchange, 1(1), 64-85.
Spencer-Rodgers, J. (2001). Consensual and individual stereotypic beliefs about international
students among American host nationals. International Journal of Intercultural
Relations, 25(6), 639-657.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures
and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
237
Streitwieser, B. T., & Light, G. J. (2018). Student conceptions of international experience in the
study abroad context. Higher Education, 75(3), 471-487.
Sumer, S., Poyrazli, S., & Grahame, K. (2008). Predictors of depression and anxiety among
international students. Journal of Counseling & Development, 86(4), 429- 437.
Tan, A., & Shahrill, M. (2015). Discovery Year Management: The four years experience.
Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 165-169.
Terenzini, P. T., & Pascarella, E. T. (1977). Voluntary freshman attrition and patterns of social
and academic integration in a university: A test of a conceptual model. Research in
Higher Education, 6(1), 25-43.
Terenzini, P. T., & Pascarella, E. T. (1978). The relation of students' precollege characteristics
and freshman year experience to voluntary attrition. Research in Higher Education, 9(4),
347-366.
Thammasiri, D., Delen, D., Meesad, P., & Kasap, N. (2014). A critical assessment of imbalanced
class distribution problem: The case of predicting freshmen student attrition. Expert
Systems with Applications, 41(2), 321-330.
Tierney, W. G. (1992). Cultural leadership and the search for community. Liberal Education, 78,
16-21.
Tierney, W. G. (1999). Models of minority college-going and retention: Cultural integrity versus
cultural suicide. Journal of Negro Education, 68(1), 80-91.
Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.).
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
238
Tinto, V. (2017). Reflections on student persistence. Student Success, 8(2), 1-8.
Tinto, V. and Pusser, B. (2006), “Moving from theory to action: building a model of institutional
action for student success”, National Postsecondary Education Cooperative, Washington,
DC. Accessed from http://nces.ed.gov/npec/pdf/Tinto_Pusser_Report.pdf
Triandis, H. C. (1996). The psychological measurement of cultural syndromes. American
Psychologist, 51(4), 407.
Trice, A. (2007). Faculty Perspectives regarding Graduate International Students’ Isolation from
Host National Students. International Education Journal, 8(1), 108–117.
Tuttle, N. & Horan, S. A. (2019). The effect of replacing 1 week of content teaching with an
intensive simulation-based learning activity on physiotherapy student clinical placement
performance. Advances in Simulation, 4(1), 1–8.
UKCOSA (The Council for International Education). (2007). Benchmarking the provision of
services for international students in higher education institutions. London: UKCOSA:
The Council for International Education.
Urban, E., & Orbe, M. P. (2007). “The syndrome of the boiled frog:” Exploring international
students on US campuses as co-cultural group members. Journal of Intercultural
Communication Research, 36(2), 117-138.
Van Hook, S. R. (2011). International learning institutions: Organization, visions, and missions.
Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=ED525287
Velicer, W., Cumming, G., Fava, J., Rossi, J., Prochaska, J., & Johnson, J. (2008). Theory testing
using quantitative predictions of effect size. Applied Psychology, 57(4), 589–608.
Verbik, L., & Lasanowski, V. (2007). International student mobility: Patterns and trends. World
Education News and Reviews, 20(10), 1-16.
239
Ward, C. A. (2001). The impact of international students on domestic students and host
institutions: A literature review. Export Education Policy Project, Ministry of Education.
Weng, F., Cheong, F., & Cheong, C. (2010). The combined effect of self-efficacy and academic
integration on higher education students studying IT majors in Taiwan. Education and
Information Technologies, 15, 333-353.
Wolf, P. S., David, A., Butler-Barnes, S. T., & Zile-Tamsen, V. (2017). American
Indian/Alaskan Native college dropout: Recommendations for increasing retention and
graduation. Journal on Race, Inequality, and Social Mobility in America, 1(1), 1.
Wood, R., & Bandura, A. (1989). Impact of conceptions of ability on self-regulatory
mechanisms and complex decision making. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 56(3), 407-415.
Yeh. T. L. (2004). Issues of college persistence between Asian and Asian Pacific American
students. Journal of College Student Retention, 6(1), 81-96.
Zajacova, A., Lynch, S., & Espenshade, T. (2005). Self-efficacy, stress, and academic success in
college. Research in Higher Education, 46(6), 677-706.
Zhang, J., & Goodson, P. (2011). Predictors of international students’ psychosocial adjustment to
life in the United States: A systematic review. International Journal of Intercultural
Relations, 35(2), 139-162.
Zhou, Y., Frey, C., & Bang, H. (2011). Understanding of international graduate students’
academic adaptation to a U.S. graduate school. International Education, 41(1), 76-94, 99-
100.
Zumeta, W., Breneman, D. W., Callan, P. M., & Finney, J. E. (2012). Financing American
higher education in the era of globalization. Harvard Education Press.
240
Zusho, A., Pintrich, P. R., & Cortina, K. S. (2005). Motives, goals, and adaptive patterns of
performance in Asian-American and Anglo-American students. Learning and Individual
Differences, 15(2), 141-158.