Experience of International Education of East Asian Students in English-speaking Countries: A four-dimensional approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Global participation in international education in the last two decades has increased exponentially.International students face difficulties in adjusting to the culture of their host country due to their unique needs (Bertram, Poulakis, Elsasser & Kumar, 2014). This article presents themes comprising the international education phenomenon involving the experiences of East Asian international students in English-speaking countries. The literature reviewed for this article pertains to many aspects of international education, covering the factors that influence the decision to embark on the international education journey to the adjustment experienced by students to the host culture. The authors suggest that the international education experience is comprised of four dimensions: structural, linguistic, internal, and external. We also posit that Confucianism, which many East Asian students follow, influences not only the psycho-social dimension of the international education experience but also their instructional preferences within the structural dimension. We further contend that students’ actual and perceived proficiency (or the lack thereof) in the host country’s language greatly shapes all aspects of thestudent’s international education experience, which then determines the degree of acculturative stress involved and plays a key role in each of the three dimensions. Because of the anticipated continued growth in the number of international students from EastAsia attending higher education institutions in English-speaking countries such as the United States, Australia, Canada, and parts of Africa, it is important to examine how each of the dimensions proposed impact each other. Approaching the study of the international education experience one dimension at a time, as many scholars have done, does not completely address all of the unique needs of international students. We suggest that research in this area be conducted holistically by exploring the ecology surrounding the international student. Taking this ecological approach will help clearly definethe role that home and host countries and host higher education institutions must take in serving theinternational students well.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".