University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Intercultural integration of students at a Sino-foreign cooperative university in China: an evaluation study

(USC Thesis Other)

Intercultural integration of students at a Sino-foreign cooperative university in China: an evaluation study

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 1
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS AT A SINO-FOREIGN
COOPERATIVE UNIVERSITY IN CHINA:
AN EVALUATION STUDY
by
Hanguo Li
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
August 2020
Copyright 2020 Hanguo Li
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 2

ABSTRACT
In the context of internationalization of higher education worldwide, China has been
making an effort to reform, modernize and internationalize its higher education system. One of
the most remarkable reforming initiatives was the creation of Sino-Foreign Cooperative
Universities (SFCU) which carried the mission of introducing advanced higher education models
and practices from different countries to support China’s higher education reforms, promote
cross-border educational and research collaboration and foster cross-culturally prepared global
citizens. Based on the gap analysis model (Clark & Estes, 2002), this study investigated the
knowledge, motivation and organizational influences on intercultural integration among students
from various cultural backgrounds in the context of an SFCU located in Eastern China. Surveys
and interviews were utilized to collect data from sophomore students to validate the assumed
influences and assess the degree to which the university had been able to create an environment
supporting students’ intercultural integration and development of their intercultural competency.
Based on the findings, the assumed influences were validated, and the university was found to
have successfully established a campus culture, academic environment and student programs that
embraced cultural diversity and facilitated the development of students’ intercultural
competency. Areas for further improvement were also identified. Solutions were recommended
with implementation and evaluation plans.

Key Words: Globalization of higher education, Intercultural integration, Cultural adaptation,
China, Joint venture university, Branch campus
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 3

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank Professor Mark Robison for showing me the way leading to this
life-changing experience in the Global Ed.D. Program. His professionalism and commitment to
globalization of education have always inspired me along the journey.
I appreciate the effort made by all the faculty of the program who collectively have made
the Global Ed.D. Program one of a kind.
I am grateful for all the guidance and support offered by Professor Tracy Tambascia, my
dissertation committee chair, and committee members, Professor Ruth Chung and Professor
Cathy Krop. They have made my dissertation adventure exciting, rewarding and enjoyable. The
dissertation would not have been possible without Professor Tambascia’s patience, kindness and
wisdom throughout the research.
The program wouldn’t be so well-organized and full of fun without Dr. Sabrina Chung
and Vanessa Ault. Thank you for being there all the time.
My classmates in Cohort 7 of the program will always occupy the most important
position in my memory of the two years. I couldn’t imagine better company than you on this
beautiful journey.

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... 2
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................................................. 3
LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................... 6
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ 7
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 11
Background of the Problem .................................................................................................. 12
Importance of Addressing the Problem ................................................................................ 15
Organizational Context and Mission .................................................................................... 17
Organizational Goal .............................................................................................................. 18
Description of Stakeholder Groups ....................................................................................... 19
Stakeholder’ Performance Goals .......................................................................................... 20
Stakeholder Group for the Study .......................................................................................... 21
Purpose of the Project and Questions ................................................................................... 22
Conceptual and Methodological Framework ........................................................................ 23
Definitions............................................................................................................................. 23
Organization of the Project ................................................................................................... 25
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ................................................................ 26
Internationalization of Global Higher Education .................................................................. 26
History, Drivers and Trend ........................................................................................... 26
International Branch Campuses .................................................................................... 28
The Opening-up of Chinese Higher Education ..................................................................... 30
The Evolvement of National Strategies on Receiving International Students .............. 30
China as a Study Abroad Destination ........................................................................... 33
Sino-Foreign Cooperative University ........................................................................... 34
Intercultural Integration of College Students ........................................................................ 36
Cultural Adaptation and Integration Theories .............................................................. 36
Inhibitors and Facilitators of Intercultural Integration .................................................. 38
The Importance of Intercultural Integration ................................................................. 40
Adaptation of Chinese Students in Western Countries ................................................. 42
Adaptation of International Students in Chinese Universities ...................................... 43
Measures to Improve Intercultural Integration ............................................................. 44
Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences ....................................................... 47
Knowledge and Skills ................................................................................................... 47
Motivation ..................................................................................................................... 51
Organizational Influences ............................................................................................. 54
CHAPTER THREE: METHODS ................................................................................................. 58
Study Participants ................................................................................................................. 58
Survey Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale .............................................. 59
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale .......................................... 60
Instrumentation and Data Collection Procedure ................................................................... 62
Surveys .......................................................................................................................... 62
Interviews ...................................................................................................................... 64
Data Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 65
Credibility and Trustworthiness ............................................................................................ 66
Ethics..................................................................................................................................... 68
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 5

Limitations and Delimitations ............................................................................................... 71
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS ........................................................................ 73
Participating Stakeholders .................................................................................................... 73
Survey Participants ....................................................................................................... 74
Interview Participants ................................................................................................... 75
Knowledge Findings ............................................................................................................. 76
Knowledge About Intercultural Competence ............................................................... 78
Skills to Effectively Communicate and Collaborate ..................................................... 87
Self-Reflecting and Evaluating Skills for Improvement ............................................... 94
Summary of Knowledge Findings ................................................................................ 96
Motivation Findings .............................................................................................................. 97
Self-Efficacy in Developing Intercultural Competence ................................................ 98
The Utility Value of Intercultural Competence .......................................................... 106
The Intrinsic Value of Experiencing Different Cultures............................................. 110
Summary of Motivation Findings ............................................................................... 118
Organization Findings ......................................................................................................... 118
An Institutional Culture Encouraging Intercultural Integration.................................. 120
Classroom Climate Facilitating Intercultural Integration ........................................... 128
Effective Extracurricular Programs Promoting Intercultural Integration ................... 133
Summary of Organizational Findings ......................................................................... 142
Summary of Results and Findings ...................................................................................... 144
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS .............................................................................. 145
Recommendations and Implementation Plan...................................................................... 145
Recommendation One: Offer Meticulously Planned and Organized Co-curricular
Cultural Programs ....................................................................................................... 146
Recommendation Two: Organize Regular Roundtable Dialogues Among
Administrators, Faculty and Student........................................................................... 149
Recommendation Three: Develop Pedagogical Strategies to Strengthen Academic
Collaboration and Integration Among Students ......................................................... 152
Recommendation Four: Increase the Percentage of International Students to 40% ... 155
Recommendation Five: Develop the Institutional Cultural Identity ........................... 158
Evaluation Plan ................................................................................................................... 162
Level One: Reaction ................................................................................................... 162
Leven Two: Learning .................................................................................................. 163
Level Three: Behavior ................................................................................................ 163
Level Four: Results ..................................................................................................... 164
Suggested Evaluation Plan .......................................................................................... 164
Limitations of the Study...................................................................................................... 166
Suggestions for Future Research ........................................................................................ 167
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 167
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................... 170
APPENDIX A: SURVEY INSTRUMENT ................................................................................ 187
APPENDIX B: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL ............................................................................... 195

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 6

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals ................... 21
Table 2 Top Source Countries and Destinations Countries of International Students (2015) ...... 27
Table 3 Sino-Foreign Cooperative Universities in China ............................................................. 35
Table 4 Assumed Knowledge Influences ..................................................................................... 51
Table 5 Assumed Motivation Influences ...................................................................................... 54
Table 6 Assumed Organizational Influences ................................................................................ 57
Table 7 Descriptive Statistics of Survey Participants (N=112) .................................................... 74
Table 8 Demographic Information of Interview Participants (N=15) .......................................... 76
Table 9 Assumed Knowledge Influences, Findings and Validation ............................................. 77
Table 10 What do you think are the three most important factors in successfully working with
people from different cultures? ..................................................................................................... 85
Table 11 Assumed Motivation Influences, Findings and Validation ........................................... 98
Table 12 Assumed Organizational Influences, Findings and Validation ................................... 119
Table 13 Overview of Recommendations ................................................................................... 146
Table 14 Implementation Plan for Recommendation One ......................................................... 148
Table 15 Implementation Plan for Recommendation Two ......................................................... 152
Table 16 Implementation Plan for Recommendation Three ....................................................... 155
Table 17 Implementation Plan for Recommendation Four......................................................... 158
Table 18 Implementation Plan for Recommendation Five ......................................................... 161
Table 19 Evaluation Plan for Recommended Solutions ............................................................. 164

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 7

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. People who are from a different cultural background than me may have different
beliefs and values. ......................................................................................................................... 79
Figure 2. People who are from a different cultural background than me may have different
beliefs and values (by nationality group). ..................................................................................... 80
Figure 3. It is important to know about the cultural backgrounds of my classmates. .................. 80
Figure 4. It is important to know about the cultural backgrounds of my classmates (by nationality
group). ........................................................................................................................................... 81
Figure 5. Which of the following statements is the most accurate for you? ................................. 83
Figure 6. Which of the following statements is the most accurate for you (by nationality group)?
....................................................................................................................................................... 83
Figure 7. What do you think are the three most important factors in successfully working with
people from different cultures? ..................................................................................................... 85
Figure 8. When I interact with classmates who are from different cultures, I am sensitive to
subtle differences in communication and meaning during our interaction. .................................. 88
Figure 9. I always know what to say when interacting with people from different cultures. ....... 89
Figure 10. I always know what to say when interacting with people from different cultures (by
nationality group). ......................................................................................................................... 89
Figure 11. I actively learn and ask questions about my classmates’ culture or background. ....... 90
Figure 12. I actively learn and ask questions about my classmates’ culture or background (by
nationality group). ......................................................................................................................... 90
Figure 13. I did NOT invest enough effort to develop friendships with classmates from different
cultural backgrounds. .................................................................................................................... 91
Figure 14. I did NOT invest enough effort to develop friendships with classmates from different
cultural backgrounds (by nationality group). ................................................................................ 91
Figure 15. I often notice similarities in personality between people who belong to completely
different cultures. .......................................................................................................................... 93
Figure 16. I often notice similarities in personality between people who belong to completely
different cultures (by nationality group). ...................................................................................... 93
Figure 17. I sometimes think about how I interact with classmates who are from different
cultures and try to take actions to improve. .................................................................................. 95
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 8

Figure 18. I sometimes think about how I interact with classmates who are from different
cultures and try to take actions to improve (by nationality group). .............................................. 95
Figure 19. I believe it is possible for me to effectively adapt to other cultures while maintaining
my own culture. ............................................................................................................................ 99
Figure 20. I believe it is possible for me to effectively adapt to other cultures while maintaining
my own culture (by nationality group). ...................................................................................... 100
Figure 21. I am confident that after graduating, I will be able to work well with people from
different countries and backgrounds in a globalized society. ..................................................... 100
Figure 22. I feel more comfortable with people from my own culture than with people from other
cultures. ....................................................................................................................................... 102
Figure 23. I feel more comfortable with people from my own culture than with people from other
cultures (by nationality group). ................................................................................................... 102
Figure 24. I avoid situations where I have to deal with classmates from other cultural
backgrounds. ............................................................................................................................... 103
Figure 25. I avoid situations where I have to deal with classmates from other cultural
backgrounds (by nationality group). ........................................................................................... 103
Figure 26. It is difficult to become close friends with classmates from other cultural
backgrounds. ............................................................................................................................... 104
Figure 27. It is difficult to become close friends with classmates from other cultural backgrounds
(by nationality group). ................................................................................................................ 105
Figure 28. My ability to interact with classmates from other cultural backgrounds has improved
since I came to LUC. .................................................................................................................. 106
Figure 29. I feel more successful as a student when I can have effective intercultural interactions
at schools. .................................................................................................................................... 107
Figure 30. Understanding how to work or interact with people from other cultures is important
for my future employability. ....................................................................................................... 107
Figure 31. I feel that people from other cultures have many valuable insights that I can learn
from in my classes. ..................................................................................................................... 108
Figure 32. Interacting with classmates from different cultural backgrounds helps me develop
cross-cultural capabilities............................................................................................................ 109
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 9

Figure 33. Developing the ability of effective cross-cultural communication and collaboration is
one of the most important reasons that I chose LUC for my college education. ........................ 111
Figure 34. Developing the ability of effective cross-cultural communication and collaboration is
one of the most important reasons that I chose LUC for my college education (by nationality
group). ......................................................................................................................................... 112
Figure 35. Learning about China is an important goal of my education at LUC. ...................... 112
Figure 36. I find interacting with classmates from different cultural backgrounds to be an
interesting experience. ................................................................................................................ 113
Figure 37. I usually look for opportunities to interact with people from other cultures. ............ 114
Figure 38. I usually look for opportunities to interact with people from other cultures (by
nationality group). ....................................................................................................................... 114
Figure 39. My classmates are interested in learning about my culture. ...................................... 116
Figure 40. My classmates are interested in learning about my culture (by nationality group). .. 116
Figure 41. Cultural diversity is one of the defining features of LUC. ........................................ 120
Figure 42. At LUC, I am encouraged to interact with classmates from different cultures. ........ 121
Figure 43. LUC has established a campus culture that embraces cultural diversity. .................. 122
Figure 44. LUC has established a campus culture that embraces cultural diversity (by nationality
group). ......................................................................................................................................... 122
Figure 45. My intercultural experiences at LUC exceeded my expectations. ............................ 123
Figure 46. My intercultural experiences at LUC exceeded my expectations (by nationality
group). ......................................................................................................................................... 123
Figure 47. I think there should be more international students at LUC. ..................................... 127
Figure 48. I think there should be more international students at LUC (by nationality group). . 128
Figure 49. The curriculum at LUC has helped me learn more about how to work with people
from different cultures. ............................................................................................................... 129
Figure 50. Professors at LUC encourage students to have interactions with classmates from
different cultures. ........................................................................................................................ 131
Figure 51. The student affairs programs at LUC effectively promote cultural diversity. .......... 134
Figure 52. The student affairs programs at LUC effectively promote cultural diversity (by
nationality group). ....................................................................................................................... 135
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 10

Figure 53. LUC provides sufficient extracurricular opportunities for me to develop abilities to
work with people from different cultures. .................................................................................. 135
Figure 54. LUC provides sufficient extracurricular opportunities for me to develop abilities to
work with people from different cultures (by nationality group). .............................................. 136
Figure 55. LUC offers helpful programs for students to gain knowledge of cultural differences.
..................................................................................................................................................... 137
Figure 56. LUC offers helpful programs for students to gain knowledge of cultural differences
(by nationality group). ................................................................................................................ 137

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 11

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
In recent decades, the internationalization of higher education has developed rapidly
across the globe, partly as a response to the globalization of the world economy (Dervin, Du, &
Härkönen, 2018). The number of students enrolled in educational institutions outside of their
country of citizenship reached 2.72 million in 2005 and increased to 4.6 million in 2015 (OECD
Centre for Educational Research and Innovation, 2017). As the largest “sender” of international
students in the world, with about 662,100 (an 8.8% increase over 2017) students studying abroad
in 2018 (MOE, 2019a), China in recent years has become an increasingly attractive destination
for studying abroad for students from all over the world. The number of international students
studying in China increased from 292,611 in 2011 (MOE, 2012) to 489,200 in 2017 (MOE,
2018), with an average annual growth rate of 8.9%. Different from Western countries’
motivations for attracting international students for economic and talent acquisition purposes (F.
Huang, 2007; Trilokekar, 2015), Chinese government and universities hope international
students could serve as cultural and economic ambassadors in China’s further
internationalization (Rienties, Nanclares, Jindal-Snape, & Alcott, 2013). Student exchange is
also an important aspect of China’s One Belt & One Road Initiative (Ma & Zhao, 2018) which is
China’s new international initiative to explore new forms of economic cooperation with more
than 60 countries that fall on the geographic regions conceptualized as the “Silk Road Economic
Belt” and the “21st Century Maritime Silk Road” (Y. Huang, 2016). From international students’
perspective, the opportunity for intercultural communication is a critical factor among others
motivating them to study in China (Dervin et al., 2018).
However, the intercultural integration of international students and domestic students has
been a challenge faced by universities in many countries (Harrison, 2012; Peacock & Harrison,
2009). China is no exception. For example, according to research conducted in Shanghai,
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 12

international and local Chinese students are two separate groups that do not mix well (Ding,
2016). The problem of practice addressed by this dissertation is the lack of interaction and
integration, both inside and outside of classrooms, among student groups with various national
and cultural backgrounds in universities in China. From the micro perspective, a low level of
intercultural integration is likely to harm the chances of gaining intercultural competences for
both international and Chinese students (Cotton, George, & Joyner, 2013). From the macro
perspective, it is likely to fail the Chinese government’s and universities’ investment in
internationalization of the student body.
Background of the Problem
As internationalization of higher education developed rapidly in the past decades, the
topic of acculturation, adaptation and social adjustment of international students has been well
researched. Berry (1985) identified four domains of adaptation issues for international students’
acculturation: environmental, sociocultural, academic and psychological. Kim (2001) argued that
cross-cultural adaptation is a progressive, interactive and cyclical process that eventually enables
international students to have a new cultural identity to adapt to the new environment without
altogether rejecting their heritage cultural identity. Though in most research, terms like
adaptation, acculturation and integration are often used interchangeably, there is a subtle
difference among them. Lin and Liu (2019) proposed that integration of newcomers is a bi-
directional intercultural process that enables them to keep their heritage language and culture
while acquiring the host language and culture (Lin & Liu, 2019). Andrade (2006) argued that
integration does not necessarily imply assimilation or permanent rejection of the heritage culture,
and cultural integrity can be kept well despite integration. Studies have found that personality
factors such as agreeableness, openness, conscientiousness and extraversion are positively
associated with psychological adaptation (Ward, Leong, & Low, 2004). Also, cultural
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 13

knowledge, language proficiency, social skills and length of stay are predictors of good cultural
adaptation (R. P. Yang, Noels, & Saumure, 2006).
Economic globalization generated a strong demand for cross-cultural communication and
collaboration skills, which is an important driver of universities’ internationalization. However,
both domestic students and international students are not following the path as colleges and
employers want them to (Harrison, 2012). The mere presence of international students does not
necessarily lead to an internationalized campus, nor does it necessarily lead to their meaningful
interaction with domestic students (Peacock & Harrison, 2009). Limited social interaction
between domestic and international students has hindered the capitalization of the new learning
opportunities made possible by culturally diverse student groups (Volet & Ang, 2012).
International students are supposed to benefit from engagement with domestic students for their
psychological adjustment and social integration, but their lack of interaction with domestic
students has been a consistent obstacle (Peacock & Harrison, 2009). Moreover, international
students who suffer from culture shock and cultural distance may undergo psychological and
mental issues (Meza & Gazzoli, 2011). It also has been pointed out that diversity in the
classroom can become a two-edged sword, offering more creative ideas and perspectives but also
possibly causing student dissatisfaction, conflict and challenges (Kelly, 2008).
There are numerous studies on the factors inhibiting intercultural interaction and
integration. For example, most students prefer developing friendships or relationships with peers
from similar cultural backgrounds (Hendrickson, Rosen, & Aune, 2011). Other inhibitors include
cultural distance (Harrison & Peacock, 2010), language barriers, bias, and academic pressure
(Kimmel & Volet, 2012; Montgomery, 2009; Peacock & Harrison, 2009). Another study found
that domestic students were unwilling to work in intercultural groups and lacked the motivation
to engage with international students (Cotton et al., 2013). In contrast, Harrison (2012) found
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 14

that some domestic students proactively seek out opportunities to learn about different cultures
even if it means occasional discomfort.
Researchers also studied the cultural integration experiences of international students in
China. S. Z. Ahmad (2015) noted that international students face significantly more challenges in
China than in Western countries due to its high-context and deep-rooted culture. As a result,
acculturative stress is more common (Bin et al., 2014). The major benefits of studying in China
as perceived by international students are learning Mandarin, friendship with Chinese students
and learning about Asia in general and its influence in the global economy (A. B. Ahmad &
Shah, 2018). Ding’s (2016) survey in Shanghai revealed that international students agreed that
interactions with local students were meaningful, but many of them found it challenging to make
friends with Chinese classmates. International students’ satisfaction level with the educational
quality and other services in Chinese universities is considerably below international benchmarks
(Ding, 2016). The key barriers for social adjustment and integration include language (Lawani,
Gai, & Titilayo, 2012), difference in cultural values and social styles (Yang, 2009), and separate
accommodations (Ding, 2016), which means domestic students and international students are
housed in different dormitory buildings in Chinese universities. Based on observed superficiality
of interaction and surface learning of culture, Yang argued that intercultural contacts might also
be potential occasions for further stereotyping and misunderstandings (Dervin et al., 2018).
Another study found that the activities organized, and social services provided by the host
Chinese universities were not adequate to allow successful cultural adaptation of international
students (Tsegay, Zegergish, & Ashraf, 2018).
To improve intercultural integration, researchers recommended various solutions. Many
suggested strategic and proactive institutional intervention such as a more internationalized
curriculum (Bodycott, Mak, & Ramburuth, 2014), course offerings on diversity (Bowman,
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 15

2013), better intercultural dynamics in classrooms (Harrison, 2012), more social networking
events (H. Li, 2017), more professional intercultural advising (Lin & Liu, 2019), shared
accommodations (Meza & Gazzoli, 2011), and peer support programs (Yu, 2010).
Importance of Addressing the Problem
The problem of students’ intercultural integration is important to address for a variety of
reasons. Intercultural integration is essential for universities to achieve the goals of
internationalization and cultivate graduates with intercultural competencies. As pointed out in a
British Council report in 2014,
Simply having a diverse student body does not mean the education or even the campus is
global in nature. What comes as an essential part of a global education is the inclusion of
international students in communities and classes. Integration of all students is an
elemental factor in the expanding concept of internationalization…The positive effects
and outputs of productive integration of international students not only affect the students
and faculty, but the caliber of education itself and the long-term promotion and marketing
prospects of a university and a nation. (British Council, 2014, p. 4)
Volet and Ang (2012) argued that universities should take the social responsibility to foster
students’ capability of intercultural adaptation, which is one of the primary goals of the
internationalization of higher education. Many other researchers suggested that universities
should address issues of integration for a variety of reasons, such as student satisfaction, future
employability and academic success (Rienties, Beausaert, Grohnert, Niemantsverdriet, &
Kommers, 2012; Severiens & Wolff, 2008; Helen Spencer-Oatey, Dauber, Jing, & Wang, 2017).
Secondly, intercultural integration is vital for students, both domestic and international, to
achieve better academic performance and employability. Facilitating interactions between
international and domestic students so that they can learn from each other is crucial for the
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 16

cultivation of their intercultural competence, which is pivotal for their future employability in
this increasingly globalized world (Cotton et al., 2013). Other researches have revealed that
intercultural interaction is positively correlated with the higher levels of students’ intercultural
competence (Jon, 2013) as well as improved overall learning outcomes and critical thinking
(Umbach & Kuh, 2006). On the contrary, unsuccessful adjustment and adaptation to a new
academic and sociocultural environment can impair international students’ chances of reaching
their academic goals. Intercultural interactions and friendships may help international students
better adjust and adapt to a culturally diverse campus environment (Bodycott et al., 2014).
Lastly, intercultural integration is an important consideration to evaluate the success of
the experimental model of Sino-Foreign Cooperative Universities (SFCU) in China. SFCUs are
expected to bring in advanced and innovative models and concepts in university governance,
curriculum, administration, teaching and learning to benefit China’s higher education reforms.
The MOE sees them as major experiments to test the best pedagogies and managerial models for
the purpose of increasing higher education quality and improving the Chinese higher education
profile (Zhang, 2016). Cultivating “global-minded graduates,” “globally sophisticated leaders
and citizens,” “responsible global citizens” and promoting “cross-cultural understanding” are
noted as important educational goals by NYU Shanghai, Duke Kunshan University and
University of Nottingham Ningbo China (DKU, 2019; NYU Shanghai, 2019; UNNC, 2019),
three leading SFCUs in China. Therefore, understanding the intercultural integration situation
and practices on these campuses is an intriguing topic for research.
The topic of international students’ cultural and academic adaptation to the host
community has been well researched. However, most of the published literature is focused on
international students studying in Western countries, such as the United States and Australia. In
contrast, the research on international students in non-Western countries, such as China, remains
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 17

underdeveloped (Jon, 2013). Very little, if any, research on intercultural integration was
conducted in the specific context of an SFCU, which is remarkably different from
internationalized Western universities and their branch campuses in other countries such as Qatar
and Singapore.
Organizational Context and Mission
The Lucas University of China (LUC, a pseudonym) is an SFCU established by a leading
Western university and a leading Chinese public university in compliance with China’s
Regulations of Chinese Foreign Cooperation in Running Schools (MOE, 2003a) and
Implementation Procedures for the Regulations of the People’s Republic of China on Sino-
Foreign Cooperation in Running Schools (MOE, 2003b). It is one of the nine existing SFCUs
approved by China’s MOE. LUC has independent legal status as a non-profit higher education
institution. It offers graduate and undergraduate education programs in multiple disciplines and
conducts research through a number of interdisciplinary research centers and platforms. The
development goal of LUC in the long run is to become a comprehensive, innovative,
international and world-class research university featuring a liberal arts undergraduate education.
It is located in a province in Eastern China where industrialization and socioeconomic
development is at a relatively high level.
The university is governed by the board of trustees (Board) consisting of representatives
from the founding university partners (the Western university and the Chinese university) and
the local government, which is the provider of land and the primary source of funding. The legal
document named The Cooperative Education Agreement defines the partnership on which the
university is instituted, as well as the roles and responsibilities of the founding partners. The
president of LUC appointed by the board is a Chinese citizen, as required by the MOE, which is
the legal representative but does not directly manage the operation of the university. The
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 18

executive vice president, also appointed by the board, is the highest executive officer and reports
to the president and the board. Most of the faculty members were recruited worldwide by the
foreign university partner and appointed by LUC. The language of instruction is English. Upon
graduation, all undergraduate students who complete the program receive two separate
bachelor’s degrees issued by the foreign university and LUC, respectively.
Students at LUC come from dozens of countries, including China. The percentage of
international students at LUC is much higher than almost all Chinese public universities and is
among the highest in the nine existing SFCUs. As an innovative international university, LUC
attaches great importance to globalism, pluralism and cultural diversity, as reflected in its
mission statement: “we embrace the integration of global, national, and local traditions of
thought and experience and promote cross-cultural understanding and cross-border
collaborations.” One of the core education principles is stated as “pluralism, tolerance and a
willingness to engage with and learn from others in preparation for living, working and leading –
effectively and ethically – in an interconnected, multicultural world.” Additionally, LUC’s
community standard calls for students to “respect other cultures and embrace all forms of
diversity.” To promote diversity and develop an inclusive campus climate, LUC formed the
Diversity and Inclusion Advisory Board (DIAB) in 2019, with 12 board members representing
administrators, faculty and students. To promote cultural diversity on campus, the Department of
Student Affairs and student organizations such as the International Association organize events
and activities on a regular basis, such as the International Fair.
Organizational Goal
The goal of LUC’s undergraduate education is to foster future leaders for the world who
can embrace pluralism, promote cross-cultural understanding and lead purposeful lives in this
interconnected world. This goal is reflected in the mission statement and other of the university’s
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 19

publicity materials. The realization of this goal can be measured in a variety of dimensions such
as the reputation among employers, parents and peer universities, the success of placement upon
graduation, the graduates’ satisfaction level regarding the educational experiences, and the long-
term career development success of graduates and their contributions to the local communities,
countries and the world. The students’ level of intercultural competence is an essential piece of
the puzzle. Therefore, whether the university is able to create the conditions to foster meaningful
and productive intercultural integration among the highly internationalized student body will be a
priority of LUC’s leadership team. The founding partners are top universities with much
experience in student affairs. However, their practices and experiences may not be directly
applicable or work well in the unique context of an SFCU. Simply transferring practices from the
foreign university partner might lead to wasted resources and low satisfaction among various
LUC stakeholders.
This evaluation study can offer important insights on what is working and what is not as
well as offer insight on how to adjust existing practices and develop novel solutions as reference
for both SFCUs and other internationalized universities.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
The following stakeholder groups have been identified to have a direct and important
influence on intercultural integration at LUC:
Undergraduate students: students enrolled in the undergraduate degree program represent
the largest student group at LUC. Compared to graduate students, they are younger and have
relatively less intercultural experiences. Though students from China account for the majority of
the undergraduate student body, a significant percentage of students come from different
continents, including North America, South America, Asia, Europe and Africa. About 60% of
the students are females. Notably, even the Chinese students come from a wide range of
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 20

provinces in China, among which cultural differences also exist. It is also important to keep in
mind that the undergraduate students, both Chinese and international, have gone through a self-
selection process and an admission process that explicitly favors a preference for more
intercultural interactions and experiences.
Faculty: The faculty team at LUC is highly international. The majority of them do not
hold Chinese passports. Even those who are ethnically Chinese or who are holding Chinese
passports have received advanced degrees from overseas, and many have teaching or research
experience in Western universities. All of them must attend a training program held at the
foreign partner university before starting their career at LUC. They are selected and recruited by
the foreign partner university according to the requirements of the liberal arts education
pedagogy. Their teaching practices in the classroom are not only the most important determinant
of academic integration of the students but also indirectly influence the students’ social
behaviors outside of the classroom.
Department of Student Affairs: The Department of Student Affairs is responsible for
providing services in housing, student engagement, psychological counseling, healthcare, and
athletics to all students at LUC. The department has about 20 full-time employees. The policies
and principles followed and the services provided reflect the unique situation of an SFCU located
in China in that both Chinese laws and regulations regarding college student management and
the foreign partner university’s philosophies and values need to be fulfilled or considered. The
department’s professional capabilities and their daily practices have a direct impact on the
students’ social life.
Stakeholder’ Performance Goals
In addition to the organization’s goal, it is important to understand the performance goals
of related key stakeholder groups to determine the group to focus on for the research and
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 21

evaluation study. Table 1 below shows a summary of LUC’s mission and the identified
performance goals of the three key stakeholder groups.
Table 1
Organizational Mission, Global Goal and Stakeholder Performance Goals
Organizational Mission
LUC is a highly selective research-oriented, liberal arts and sciences university located in
China, whose primary mission is to enable students from around the world to lead purposeful
and productive lives. By delivering the highest quality undergraduate and graduate education
that is truly interdisciplinary, we prepare students for professional, intellectual and societal
leadership roles across the globe.
Organizational Performance Goal
To build an ecological system that effectively fosters student’s intercultural competence
through intercultural interactions and integration.
Undergraduate Students
To gain the skillset and
mindset that enable them to
demonstrate intercultural
competence upon graduation
and become global citizens.

Faculty
To uphold the philosophy of
liberal arts education and
prepare students to become
future global leaders with
intercultural competence in
various professions.
Student Affairs Staff
To develop policies and
provide services and
extracurricular programs that
support students to have
successful intercultural
integration experiences and
develop intercultural
competence

Stakeholder Group for the Study
While the joint effort of all stakeholders will contribute to the achievement of the overall
organizational goal of fostering global citizens with excellent intercultural competence, it is
important to start from understanding where the undergraduate students are currently with regard
to their performance goal. Therefore, the stakeholders of focus for this study are currently
enrolled undergraduate students. For them, the goal is to successfully graduate not only with the
degrees but also with the necessary capabilities, including strong intercultural competence, that
will pave the way for them to become global citizens and future world leaders. Though their
intercultural competence could be measured by specific instruments (Deardorff, 2006), the more
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 22

important and relevant measurement is whether they will be competitive enough in the global job
market and how well they will adapt to the new cultural environment if they choose to pursue
advanced degrees in other countries, which will be critical for a young university’s reputation
and marketability among prospective students, their parents and employers. From this
perspective, students are both the essential research participants and beneficiaries of this study. If
we do not have an idea about where they are, what they are thinking, what they need and what
progress they have made, there is no way to have a clear big picture of the intercultural
integration at LUC or to present recommendations on improvement. Therefore, the students are
identified as the best stakeholder group to focus on for this study.
Purpose of the Project and Questions
The purpose of this project is to evaluate the degree to which LUC is achieving its goal of
cultivating global citizens and leaders through offering a campus environment that supports
intercultural integration and effectively fosters students’ intercultural competence. The research
focused on knowledge, motivation and organizational (KMO) influences related to achieving this
organizational goal. While a complete evaluation project would focus on all LUC’s stakeholders,
for practical purposes, the stakeholders to be focused on in this analysis are all currently enrolled
undergraduate students.
As such, three questions guided this study:
1. What are the undergraduate students’ knowledge and motivation related to achieving
high intercultural competence through intercultural integration?
2. How does LUC support the students’ knowledge and motivation to pursue intercultural
integration outcomes?
3. What are the recommendations for LUC to improve its organizational practice in the
areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources?
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 23

Conceptual and Methodological Framework
Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis, a systematic and analytical method that helps to
clarify organizational goals and identify the KMO influences, was adapted to an evaluation
model and implemented as the conceptual framework for this study. The methodological
framework adopted was mixed-method data collection and analysis with descriptive statistics.
Assumed KMO influences that could impact LUC’s organizational goal achievement were
generated based on personal knowledge and related literature. These influences were assessed
through the analysis of data generated from surveys and interviews. Finally, research-based
solutions were recommended, and the implementation and evaluation plans were presented.
Definitions
Integration: In much relevant literature, the terms “integration,” “adaptation” and
“acculturation” have been used interchangeably in different settings, carrying largely similar
connotations (H. Li, 2017). According to Kim (1988), “assimilation,” “acculturation” and
“integration” have all been embraced and incorporated into the more generic and overarching
concept of “cross-cultural adaptation,” which is defined as the “dynamic process by which
individuals, upon relocating to new, unfamiliar, or changed cultural environments, establish (or
reestablish) and maintain relatively stable, reciprocal, and functional relationships with those
environments” (Kim, 1988, p. 31). In this dissertation, the term “integration” is used more often
than others because of the concurrence of Andrade’s (2006) point of view that integration does
not imply assimilation or permanent rejection of the home culture, the integrity of which can be
maintained despite successful integration. This is also a reflection of the pluralism premise
arguing that acculturation should be seen as a bi-directional process that does not demand
enormous changes in values or beliefs within the acculturating group (Kim, 2001).
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 24

Intercultural competence: Based on a study conducted by Deardorff (2006) in search of
the most widely accepted definition of “intercultural competence,” the one with the most votes is
Byram’s “Knowledge of others; knowledge of self; skills to interpret and relate; skills to discover
and/or to interact; valuing others’ values, beliefs, and behaviors; and relativizing one’s self.
Linguistic competence plays a key role” (p.247). The second highest-rated one was from
Lambert, with five components: “world knowledge, foreign language proficiency, cultural
empathy, approval of foreign people and cultures, ability to practice one’s profession in an
international setting” (Deardorff, 2006, p. 247). Three common elements of intercultural
competence were identified by Deardorff: “the awareness, valuing, and understanding of cultural
differences; experiencing other cultures; and self-awareness of one’s own culture” (p. 247).
These common elements stress the underlying importance of cultural awareness, both of one’s
own as well as others’ cultures (Deardorff, 2006).
Sino-Foreign Cooperative University (SFCU): According to the (MOE, 2003a), an SFCU
(also known as joint-venture university) is defined as a higher education institution with
independent legal status based on “the cooperation between foreign educational institutions and
Chinese educational institutions in establishing educational institutions within the territory of
China to provide education service mainly to Chinese citizens” (Article 1.2). In some academic
literature, together with a large number of cooperative institutions without independent legal
status (as a school affiliated to a Chinese university), SFCUs are often referenced as international
branch campuses of foreign universities, which is technically incorrect from the legal
perspective. However, since all these non-independent cooperative institutions and SFCUs
mainly follow the curricular and pedagogies of the foreign university partners (Zhang, 2016) and
offer degrees issued by the foreign university partners, there are particular merits in
understanding these institutions as branch campuses of the foreign universities. The SFCUs
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 25

adopt different strategies, mainly for marketing purposes, in terms of presenting their
institutional status. For instance, Shanghai New York University claims itself as the third degree-
granting campus of the NYU Global Network (NYU Shanghai, 2019), while Duke Kunshan
University consistently presents itself as an SFCU or a joint venture with independent legal
status (DKU, 2019).
Organization of the Project
Five chapters were used to organize this study. This chapter provides the key concepts
and terminology commonly found in a discussion about college students’ intercultural adaptation
and integration. The organization’s mission, goals and stakeholders and the framework for the
project were introduced. Chapter Two provides a review of current literature surrounding the
scope of the study. Topics of higher education internationalization, international students’
cultural adaptation and integration, China’s SFCUs, international students’ cultural adaptation in
China, and suggested solutions to integration problems were also covered. Chapter Three details
the KMO influences to be examined as well as methodology and sampling of research
participants, data collection and analysis. In Chapter Four, the data and results are presented and
analyzed. Chapter Five discusses the recommended solutions, based on data and literature, for
improvement. Suggestions for implementation and evaluation plans for the solutions were also
discussed.

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 26

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Internationalization of Global Higher Education
Internationalization of higher education is defined by Knight and De Wit (1995) as a
process of integrating new elements and perspectives of global, international and intercultural
into the mission, capability or delivery of higher education. International student mobility is an
important manifestation as well as a driver of the internationalization of higher education
institutions worldwide.
History, Drivers and Trend
Global economic growth is considered the key driver of the internationalization of higher
education worldwide (J. Li, 2019b). In recent decades, the internationalization of higher
education around the world has been developing rapidly, featuring an increasing population of
international students, which refers to the students enrolled in educational institutions outside
their countries of citizenship (OECD, 2013). The total number of international students increased
from about 2.0 million in 1999 (Choudaha, 2017) to more than 5.0 million in 2018, representing
an average annual growth rate of 5%. According to OECD’s forecast, the total number of
international students is likely to reach 7.2 million by 2025 (OECD, 2013). Asian countries
supply more than half of all international students, and the most popular destinations are English-
speaking and Western-European countries (Jon, Lee, & Byun, 2014). Table 2 below presents the
top five source countries and destination countries of international student mobility as of 2015.

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 27

Table 2
Top Source Countries and Destinations Countries of International Students (2015)
Source countries % of world’s total Destination countries % of world’s total
China 17.1 USA 19.1
India 6.0 UK 8.5
Germany 2.3 Australia 7.5
South Korea 2.1 France 4.8
France 1.8 Germany 4.8
Data source: (UNESCO, 2016)

It is worth noting that Chinese students going abroad to study during 2018 reached 0.66
million (MOE, 2019a). According to the Open Doors 2018 report issued by the Institute of
International Education (IIE, 2019), 33% of the 1.1 million enrolled international students in the
US during the academic year of 2017/18 came from China, which is by far the largest sending
country. China also provided the most international students to the UK, Australia, Canada, Japan
and New Zealand by 2014 (Ma, 2017).
Numerous scholars have studied the drivers of the increasing number of international
students from the institutional perspective. Choudaha (2017) pointed out that the rise of
information technologies in the 1990s and the entailed increasing demand for specialized talents
at OECD countries drove the first wave of international student mobility. F. Huang (2007)
argued that developed countries, especially Australia, Canada, the UK and the US, have been
increasingly driven by commercial considerations to receive more international students since
the 1990s. Education for international students has become an important type of export for these
countries. J. Li (2019b) also pointed out that higher education at specific universities in these
countries has gradually become a commodity just like other physical products. For example,
according to the US Department of Commerce, international students have contributed $42
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 28

billion to the US economy in 2017 (IIE, 2019). In addition to economic considerations, the US
and Canada also see international student education as a means to recruit and retain professional
talent once students graduate (Trilokekar, 2015).
There are also studies seeking to understand the motivations and decision-making
processes of students who choose to study abroad and how they determine their destinations. A
push-pull model is often used to explain international student mobility from the students’
perspectives: pushed by unfavorable conditions in their home countries and pulled by a more
advanced level of social and economic development in the destination countries (Ma, 2017).
Personal factors were also considered in the model, such as the pursuit of better academic and
career prospects, increased income and enhanced social status (M. Li & Bray, 2007). In general,
international students are motivated by both macro and personal factors.
English-speaking developed countries are still dominant destinations for international
students, but some Asian countries, particularly China, are becoming attractive destinations as
well. In recent years, China, Malaysia, Singapore and Japan have made a tremendous effort in
transforming from the role of “senders” to “receivers” of international students (Ding, 2016).
Wilkins, Balakrishnan, and Huisman (2012) observed the new trend of international students
flowing “from east to east,” in comparison with the traditional “from east to west” (p. 414). For
example, in 2015, Chinese students accounted for 56% and 62% of all international students
studying in Japan and Korea, respectively (CCG, 2016). According to China’s MOE, in 2017,
0.49 million international students were studying in China, which has made China the largest
destination for international education in Asia.
International Branch Campuses
Under the background of higher education internationalization, international branch
campuses (IBCs) operated in non-Western countries have burgeoned since the 1990s. According
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 29

to The Observatory on Borderless Higher Education, IBCs refer to educational institutions that
are owned, or partially owned, by foreign universities, carry the names or brand elements of the
foreign universities, and offer academic programs, mainly on-site, leading to degrees issued by
the foreign universities (Garrett, Kinser, Lane, Merola, & C-BERT 2016). It is a brand-new
model of international higher education that allows universities to offer education programs in
other countries without concern for reducing the demand for students at home campuses
(Wilkins et al., 2012). Their unique advantages have made them a popular alternative to Western
universities’ home campuses. The number of IBCs increased from only 18 in 2002 to 263 in late
2017 (Garrett, 2018). By the end of 2015, IBCs in 76 countries have enrolled more than 180,000
students.
Building IBCs is considered an effective strategy to increase the quality of higher
education and strengthen human capital in the hosting countries (McBurnie & Ziguras, 2014).
For example, in an effort to introduce top curriculum, recruit world-class faculty, cultivate local
talents, and attract more international students, several Asian countries have made investments to
attract prestigious foreign universities to establish IBCs. In 2015, China, Singapore and Malaysia
hosted the most IBCs in the Asia Pacific region, with 32, 12 and 12, respectively (Garrett et al.,
2016). In general, developed countries with advanced higher education systems, such as the US,
the UK and Australia, are the major exporters of IBCs to developing countries, such as China
and Malaysia. Developed and wealthy countries with a strong demand for talent and knowledge,
such as Qatar and Singapore, are also important importers (Lien & Keithley, 2018).
Though the purposes of establishing IBCs are similar, five different models have been
adopted in different cultural and political contexts: (a) self-funded, (b) funding from host
countries, (c) support from private sectors, (d) facilities leased from private sectors, and (e)
collaboration with a local university partner (Garrett et al., 2016). For example, Dubai adopted a
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 30

free-market approach compared to Qatar’s more centralized and strategic approach with the deep
involvement of government planning and funding. China demands all branch campuses be
organized as formal Sino-Foreign partnerships (Kinser & Lane, 2016). Despite the different
models, IBCs have brought international talent, facilitated cross-border research and
strengthened the education system of the hosting countries. They have also backed up the
internationalization strategy of foreign universities. However, as Kinser and Lane (2016) pointed
out, some issues need serious considerations, such as national sovereignty and academic
freedom.
The Opening-up of Chinese Higher Education
This study focused on the case of LUC which is an SFCU with independent legal status.
The creation of this type of university was a part of China’s strategy to internationalize and
modernize its higher education system. To better understand the students’ intercultural
integration at LUC, it is necessary to look at the political and historical context of the opening-up
of the higher education sector in the past decades.
The Evolvement of National Strategies on Receiving International Students
The history of international student education in China went through five different stages
since the establishment of the People’s Republic of China in 1949 (Ma, 2017; Ma & Zhao,
2018). During the first stage (1950–1965), China’s international student education was only
limited to a small number of students, mainly from socialist countries in Africa, Latin American
and Asia (Ma, 2017). The second stage (1966–1977) was the decade of China’s Cultural
Revolution, during which universities were shut down, and international student education was
interrupted. After the Cultural Revolution ended in 1976, with universities reopened and
diplomatic relations with 124 countries reestablished, China started to receive international
students again (Ma, 2017). The third stage (1978–1989) was the decade after China started its
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 31

reform and began opening up. During this period, Chinese universities developed steadily and
made progress in international student education (Ma, 2017). The fourth stage (1990–1998) was
marked by the State Council’s Notice on Piloting in Selected Institutions of Higher Education the
Interim Methods for Higher Education Institutions to Award Chinese Degrees to International
Students (State Council, 1991), promoting international student exchanges (Ma & Zhao, 2018).
The fifth stage (1999 to present) has seen the dramatic growth of international students studying
in China.
In January 2000, the MOE, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Ministry of Public Security
co-issued the Regulations on Management of Institutions of Higher Education in their
Acceptance of International Students (MOE, 2000) which emphasized the importance of
educating international students and standardized the practices across institutions for the purpose
of better developing international student education. In 2010, the State Council issued The
National Outline for Medium and Long-term Educational Reform and Development (2010-2020)
as a national strategic guideline for education development (State Council, 2010), in which a
number of policies and initiatives, such as more scholarships, were proposed to attract more
international students (A. B. Ahmad & Shah, 2018). During this period, the number of
international students enrolled in Chinese universities grew from approximately 50,000 in 2000
to 489,200 in 2017 (MOE, 2018). Students came from 204 countries and were enrolled in 935
higher education institutions in China, with 49.4% of them enrolled in degree programs (MOE,
2018). In 2017, China became the most popular destination in Asia for international students and
the third worldwide (MOE, 2017b), trailing only the US and the UK (IIE, 2019).
Ma (2017) identified three major changes over the years in China’s international student
education: a higher percentage of degree-seeking students, a greater number of institutions
receiving international students, and more diversified countries of origin. Courses taught in
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 32

English for international students has also become a trend at many leading Chinese universities
(A. B. Ahmad & Shah, 2018). Hao Ping, then Vice Minister of Education, pointed out in 2009
that internationalization had been among the most important indicators of success in Chinese
universities (Hao, 2009). Ding (2016) believed that the number of international students in China
would continue to grow in the coming years if China’s economic growth could sustain.
Different from Canada and the US, China’s effort to attract international students are not
directly associated with talent acquisition and immigration. Following The Administrative
Regulation on Foreigner’s Employment in China (revised in 2017), prior work experiences and
employers’ special needs that cannot be fulfilled by Chinese candidates are the preconditions of
employing foreigners (Ministry of HR and Social Security, 2017). Scholars argue that China’s
purpose of attracting international students is mainly to increase the world’s understanding of
China, make more people think well about China, educate more friends who are knowledgeable
about China, and support Chinese universities to be more internationalized and globally
competitive (Liu & Lin, 2016; Ma & Zhao, 2018).
Despite the rapidly increasing number of international students, significant issues are
emerging as well. For example, the level of education remains low (Ma & Zhao, 2018), with
only 15.5% of all international students enrolling as graduate students (MOE, 2018). Besides,
universities have focused more on quantity rather than the quality of international students (Ma
& Zhao, 2018), and the “easy in and easy out” approach (the low threshold for both admission
and graduation) has compromised the integrity and quality of the degrees for international
students (J. Wang, 2014). The Chinese government has recently recognized this issue and made
various efforts to tackle it, including the issuance of Several Proposals on Opening-up of
Education in the New Era in 2016 emphasizing quality, standardization and rule-based
management of international student education rather than the sole pursuit of quantity. The
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 33

Chinese government has also introduced preparatory programs for international students, created
a quality accreditation system and issued Regulations on Recruitment and Education of
International Students in China in 2017, which specifies measures to improve the quality of
international student education (Ma & Zhao, 2018).
China as a Study Abroad Destination
There are many reasons why China has become a more attractive destination for
international students. T. Chen and Barnett (2000) noted that a country’s economic and political
power is positively correlated to its position in international student mobility. China’s robust
economic growth and future prospect is a key factor that makes the country attractive for
international students (A. B. Ahmad & Shah, 2018; Dervin et al., 2018; Ding, 2016; Ma, 2017).
Other often mentioned factors include the distinctive language and culture (A. B. Ahmad &
Shah, 2018; Ma, 2017), affordability of tuition and living (A. B. Ahmad & Shah, 2018; Dervin et
al., 2018) and access to scholarships (A. B. Ahmad & Shah, 2018; Dervin et al., 2018; Ma,
2017). Scholarships from the Chinese government were offered to 40,600 international students
in 2015, and the amount of financial aid for full-time, degree-seeking international students
increased five times from 2005 to 2015 (Student.com, 2016). Though some international students
consider the quality of the learning environment in China an attractive factor (A. B. Ahmad &
Shah, 2018), Ma (2017) argued that China’s academic and research environment might inhibit
the decision to choose China when compared to Western countries with highly advanced higher
education systems. If China can provide better-quality education, it will become a new growth
point for the country to attract even more international talent. Lastly, many international students
who are ethnically Chinese choose to study in China in search of their cultural roots (Ma, 2017).

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 34

Sino-Foreign Cooperative University
The higher education system in China is the largest in the world (China Daily, 2017) in
terms of total student enrollment. According to MOE data, in 2017, there were 2,913 colleges
and universities with a total student enrollment of 37.8 million in Chinese Mainland. Private
colleges and universities totaled 747, accounting for 25.6% of all higher education institutions in
China (MOE, 2017a).
China’s exploration of Sino-Foreign Cooperative Education started in the 1990s, with
joint programs such as the Master of Business Administration (J. Li, 2019a). By 2018, there were
1,024 such joint undergraduate and graduate degree programs offered in China (People.cn,
2018). In 2003, the State Council issued the Regulations on Sino-Foreign Cooperation in
Running Schools to standardize the establishment and management of cooperative institutions
(MOE, 2003c) and also to further open up the education sector as promised to the World Trade
Organization. The regulation defined two types of Sino-Foreign cooperative educational
institutions. The first type refers to those without independent legal status. In other words, those
that are, from the legal perspective, schools affiliated to a Chinese university. There were 88
such types of institutions by September 2018 (People.cn, 2018). The second type refers to those
with independent legal status. In other words, they are independent universities jointly
established on the partnership between a Chinese university and a foreign university (referred to
as SFCU in this study). By June 2019, there were nine SFCUs established in China (MOE,
2019c), as shown in Table 3 below.

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 35

Table 3
Sino-Foreign Cooperative Universities in China
SFCU Foreign university partner Chinese university
partner
Founded Location
University of Nottingham
Ningbo China
University of Nottingham
(UK)
Wanli College 2004 Ningbo,
Zhejiang
BNU-HKBU United
International College
Hong Kong Baptist University
(Hong Kong, China)
Beijing Normal
University
2005 Zhuhai,
Guangdong
XJTU-Liverpool University Liverpool University (UK) Xi’an Jiao Tong
University
2006 Suzhou,
Jiangsu
Shanghai New York
University
New York University (USA) East China Normal
University
2012 Shanghai
Duke Kunshan University Duke University (USA) Wuhan University 2013 Kunshan,
Jiangsu
Wenzhou-Kean University Kean University (USA) Wenzhou University 2014 Wenzhou,
Zhejiang
Chinese University of Hong
Kong (Shenzhen)
Chinese University of Hong
Kong (Hong Kong, China)
Shenzhen University 2014 Shenzhen,
Guangdong
Shenzhen BIT-Moscow
University
Lomonosov Moscow State
University (Russia)
Beijing Institute of
Technology
2016 Shenzhen,
Guangdong
Guangdong Technion Israel
Institute of Technology
Technion - Israel Institute of
Technology (Israel)
Shantou University 2016 Shantou,
Guangdong
Note: BNU-HKBU United International College and The Chinese University of Hong Kong (Shenzhen) were
established and regulated in accordance with the Regulations on Sino-Foreign Cooperation in Running Schools
in spite of the fact that Hong Kong Baptist University and The Chinese University of Hong Kong are registered in
Hong Kong Special Administration Region, a territory of the People’s Republic of China.
From “List of Institutions and Programs Approved by MOE,” MOE’s Regulatory Information Platform, 2019
(http://www.crs.jsj.edu.cn/index/sort/1006)

Although the SFCUs are technically independent universities registered in China, they
are more like full-scale branch campuses adopting the foreign partner’s pedagogy and structure
with minor modifications required by MOE’s accreditation (Stanfield & Wang, 2015). The
Chinese government has been encouraging SFCUs to introduce the curriculum and managerial
experiences from countries with advanced higher education systems to support the reforms and
modernization of the Chinese higher education system (Zhang, 2016). After years of rapid
development, SFCUs and other cooperative educational institutions have gone beyond students
and scholars exchange, and are playing an indispensable role in China’s higher education system
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 36

(Iftekhar & Kayombo, 2016). While the world has seen tremendous progress in the opening up
of Chinese higher education, the intercultural integration of Chinese students and international
students on Chinese campuses has lagged and presented challenges.
Intercultural Integration of College Students
To better study the students’ intercultural integration at LUC where both Chinese
students and international students are facing the challenges of cultural adaptation in different
ways, it is helpful to review the existing literature on relevant theories, the intercultural
experiences of Chinese students studying abroad and international students studying in China,
and suggested solutions by researchers.
Cultural Adaptation and Integration Theories
Theories of acculturation, cultural adaptation, transition, adjustment and integration have
been well researched. All of this research aimed to find the answer to the general question of, as
described by Berry (2005), “How can people of different cultural backgrounds encounter each
other, seek avenues of mutual understanding, negotiate and compromise on their initial positions,
and achieve some degree of harmonious engagement?” (p. 698). Scholars have proposed various
theories and models to describe and explain the process. One of the most cited researchers in this
field is Berry, who defined acculturation as a “process of cultural and psychological changes that
involve various forms of mutual accommodations, leading to some long-term psychological and
sociocultural adaptations” between two or more cultural groups and their individual members
(Berry, 2005). He identified four different acculturation strategies from the perspective of non-
dominant groups, basing on their attitude and behavior toward the maintenance of their heritage
culture and interaction with other cultural groups.
The first is called assimilation, which means individuals wish to shed their heritage
cultural identity and become absorbed into the dominant culture. The second is called separation,
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 37

when individuals want to stick to their original culture and avoid interaction with other cultural
groups. The third is called integration, in which individuals are interested in both maintaining a
certain degree of their heritage culture and participating actively as a member of a more
extensive social network of the dominant culture. The fourth is marginalization, in which there is
minimal interest in either. Berry (2005) pointed out that individuals pursuing the strategy of
integration would experience less stress, better adaptation and least conflict, but it demands
substantial negotiation and accommodation. Generally, in societies accepting cultural pluralism
and supporting cultural diversity, integration is considered the appropriate and preferred way
(Berry, 2005). This notion was supported by the results of a study of 5,000 immigrant youth
settled in 13 countries conducted bySam, Berry, Phinney, and Vedder (2006). Berry (2005) also
emphasized the distinction between assimilation and integration, which involve different
attitudes and behaviors. For this study of LUC’s 256 students in the sophomore class coming
from 27 countries, understanding the effective integration of students with diverse cultural
backgrounds is essential to find out the most critical factors of success in the context of an
internationalized university in China.
Scholars have also studied acculturation and cross-cultural adaptation, specifically from
the perspectives of international students. Kim (2001) suggested that cross-cultural adaptation is
an interactive process involving both international students and the host. It also involves students
seeking both acculturation (of the new culture) and deculturation (of the heritage culture). Adler
(1975) described cross-cultural adaptation as a movement from low self- and cultural awareness
to high self- and cultural awareness that consists of stages of contact, disintegration,
reintegration, autonomy, and independence. It is similar to the U-shaped models proposed by
Lysgaard (1955) and Trifonovitch (1977): a “honeymoon” beginning followed by a drop with
hostility due to maladjustment and eventually return to the top after cultural adaptation. Berry
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 38

(1985) identified four main categories of problems that international students face:
environmental, sociocultural, academic and psychological.
This study focused on the key concept of integration in a multicultural context as defined
above by Berry (2005). Lin and Liu (2019) described intercultural integration, in places where
cultural diversity is embraced, as a bi-directional strategy that enables students to maintain their
heritage culture and language while experiencing the host culture and language. According to
Helen Spencer-Oatey et al. (2017), integration is a process composed of mixing, personal
adaptation, synthesizing and mutual accommodation, leading to a sense of belonging. Andrade
(2006) concurs with the argument that integration does not mean assimilation or permanent
rejection of the heritage culture, and it helps international students grow and achieve better
academic performance. She also argues that the integrity of the students’ heritage culture can be
preserved despite integration. Kim (2008) also rejected the concept of a static and monolithic
cultural identity. Instead, she advocated for an intercultural identity that is opened-ended and
adaptive, which better fits an interconnected world where boundaries between nations and people
are blurred.
Inhibitors and Facilitators of Intercultural Integration
Through research conducted in different countries, scholars have identified the factors
that inhibit or facilitate the intercultural integration process. Peacock and Harrison (2009)
pointed out that having international students on campus does not guarantee meaningful
internationalization or intercultural interaction. It is well understood that intercultural
engagements present beneficial learning opportunities, but lack of interaction between
international students and domestic students has been a consistent and widely seen problem
(Peacock & Harrison, 2009; Volet & Ang, 2012). For example, based on a study conducted by
the UK Council for International Student Affairs (Merrick, 2004), two-thirds of international
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 39

students return home after studying in the UK without a single British friend. Both international
students and domestic students tend to work and develop friendships with conational students or
those from similar cultural backgrounds (Hendrickson et al., 2011; Peacock & Harrison, 2009;
Volet & Ang, 2012), which Peacock and Harrison (2009) described as “passive xenophobia.” It
can be explained by the influence of cultural distance highlighting the distinctions between
different cultural groups (Harrison & Peacock, 2010). Individuals often feel less threat and
anxiety when they interact with others from similar cultural backgrounds (Harrison & Peacock,
2010). According to Church (1982) and Kim (2001), for international students, conational
friendship networks can provide short-term support when they are faced with cultural shock.
However, it will be an inhibitor of cultural adaptation for them in the long run.
Domestic students’ passive avoidance of interaction with international students also
arises from factors such as language barriers, bias, fear of inadvertent offense and pressure for
academic performance (Harrison & Peacock, 2010; Peacock & Harrison, 2009). Hyde and Ruth
(2002) also pointed out that students in a multicultural environment have the tendency to self-
censor, which means students intentionally avoid specific culturally sensitive topics or honest
expression of their real opinions due to the concern of potential conflicts. A study conducted in
New Zealand found that, when the percentage of international students on campus reached above
15%, domestic students’ views about international students became less positive and reflect more
anxiety due to perceived threat caused by cultural distance (Ward et al., 2005). Leask and Carroll
(2011) also found that domestic students are more resistant to having international engagement
on their home campuses. Cotton et al. (2013) argued that domestic students’ reluctance and lack
of motivation to engage with international students had become important barriers to the
interactions between the groups. However, there is also evidence found that some domestic
students proactively embrace the opportunities of having intercultural interactions and
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 40

collaborations, and building intercultural friendship in spite of occasional discomfort (Harrison,
2012).
To have effective intercultural adaptation, international students need to develop
intercultural competence and reconstruct their cultural identity (Gill, 2007). Specific personality
characters such as agreeableness, open-mindedness, outgoingness and conscientiousness are
positively correlated to successful psychological adjustment of international students (Ward et
al., 2004). The research conducted by R. P. Yang et al. (2006) identified cultural knowledge,
language proficiency, social skills and length of stay in the host country are facilitating factors of
effective cultural adaptation.
The Importance of Intercultural Integration
Intercultural integration of international students and domestic students is of critical
importance for both the universities and the student groups. From the institutional perspective,
Gu, Schweisfurth, and Day (2010) argued that international students are vital for universities’
long-term success from both financial and cultural perspectives. Successful integration of
international students benefits not only students and faculty but the overall education quality and
the long-term reputation and competitiveness of a university, even a nation, as well (British
Council, 2014). In the context of economic globalization, there is a strong demand for
individuals who can demonstrate excellent intercultural competence which is sought out by
employers worldwide (Harrison, 2012). Research shows that intercultural interaction is
positively related to a high level of intercultural competence (Jon, 2013). Cotton et al. (2013)
argued that universities should adopt an institutional-level holistic strategy to create an
environment that fosters intercultural engagement among student groups to develop students’
intercultural competence and global perspectives, which are essential for their employability.
Besides, Helen Spencer-Oatey et al. (2017) noted that integration is also crucial for student
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 41

satisfaction and academic success. Academic and social integration was also identified by Tinto
(1975) as an imperative condition for successful student retention at universities. Volet and Ang
(2012) argued that it is universities’ social responsibility to support students’ development of
intercultural competence as a vital goal of the internationalization of higher education.
Intercultural interactions and friendships could help students adjust to a culturally diverse
environment and positively influence their ability to achieve personal and academic goals
(Bodycott et al., 2014). Glass and Westmont (2014) found that academic success is correlated to
high levels of intercultural interaction and a strong sense of belonging to the university for both
international students and domestic students. The studies by Umbach and Kuh (2006) and
Rienties et al. (2012) also found that academic integration and intercultural engagement have a
positive influence on students’ learning performance and improve critical thinking.
In summary, effective intercultural integration helps build students’ intercultural
competence, which is demanded by the globalized world. International students who fail to
integrate interculturally may experience compromised academic performance, poor mental health
and dissatisfaction with the university. Lack of integration could also mean lost opportunities for
domestic students to gain intercultural skills and perspectives. At the institutional level, it may
negatively impact the universities’ internationalization strategy and their mission of education.
The study in this dissertation is in the context of an SFCU, where the campus
environment is modeled after the foreign university partner, even though it is technically a
Chinese university located in China. Therefore, it is worthwhile to learn more about findings
from previous research on cultural adaptation of two groups of students: Chinese students
studying in Western countries and international students studying in Chinese universities, which
will be discussed in the following sections.

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 42

Adaptation of Chinese Students in Western Countries
China is the currently largest sender of international students in the world. There is a
large amount of literature about the cultural adaptation of Chinese students studying abroad,
particularly in developed Western countries such as the US, the UK, Australia and Canada.
Many studies found that Chinese international students have experienced significant difficulties
in the process of cross-cultural adjustment, such as acculturative stress and anxiety, low English
proficiency, lack of social and classroom participation, and perceived prejudice and bias
(Chataway & Berry, 1989; Wan, 2001; C. Wang & Mallinckrodt, 2006; Will, 2016), due to the
differences in educational systems and sociocultural norms between China and Western
countries (Wan, 2001). Peacock and Harrison (2009) pointed out that Chinese students were
often considered by Western students and faculty to be the most culturally distant and the most
self-excluding. Razek and Brown (2015) and Ma (2017) found that Chinese students were less
motivated to get involved in an American peer group if there are enough Chinese fellow students
to form a social circle. Research by Zhao, Kuh, and Carini (2005) found that international
students from East Asian countries have fewer diversity experiences than other racial or ethnic
groups, which made their acculturation in Western countries more difficult.
Based on the studies by Ruan and Zhu (2015) and Razek and Brown (2015), it was not
the language barrier, but the perceived cultural, value and ideological differences that deterred
and discouraged Chinese students’ intercultural engagement and formation of intercultural
friendship. Some Chinese international students complained about misinformed and prejudiced
views of China demonstrated by domestic students (Hail, 2015). Others felt uncomfortable with
the perceived superiority of their American peers and felt most American students had little
interest in making friends with Chinese international students except for those who wanted to
learn the Chinese language (Will, 2016). Valdez (2015) found that Chinese international students
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 43

also struggled with the internal identity conflict of being Chinese and being “Americanized” if
they choose to integrate with American students better. Interestingly, a study conducted in
Germany by H. Li (2017) found that cross-cultural integration was not an indispensable
condition for Chinese students to achieve academic success.
Adaptation of International Students in Chinese Universities
In the past decade, as the number of international students studying in Chinese
universities has increased dramatically, some scholars have begun studying their cultural
adaptation. In general, international students value the need to learn Chinese culture and
language while studying in China and consider it beneficial to establish a friendship with
Chinese students (A. B. Ahmad & Shah, 2018). The Chinese language is often viewed not only
as a tool of learning the culture but a key component of the Chinese culture by international
students (Chiang, 2015). However, compared to Western cultures, Chinese culture is far more
challenging for international students, particularly non-Asian students, to adapt to due to its
deep-rooted and high-context features (S. Z. Ahmad, 2015). For example, Westerners see
themselves as an individual with attributes independent of external conditions or personal
relations, but Chinese’s self-identity is based on their relations to the groups they are in, such as
families and societies. Hence harmony as a group often prevails individual success (Nisbett,
2003).
Further, research by Bin et al. (2014) found that international students in China are
reporting acculturative stress more prevalently than in developed countries. According to a study
conducted at several universities located in Shanghai, although 62.4% of the surveyed
international students considered engagement with Chinese classmates an integral part of college
life, as high as 37.8% admitted that they had difficulties in making friends with local students.
Some described that international and local Chinese students are literally two separate groups
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 44

that barely engage (Ding, 2016). Language is one of the barriers because most Chinese residents
do not speak English in their daily lives. Before international students can fluently speak
Mandarin, it is formidable to have effective communication with local people, which results in
poor cultural adjustment (Lawani et al., 2012). The research by Yu (2010) also found that
language anxiety played a very negative role in both sociocultural and academic adaptation of
international students in China. Research by Tsegay et al. (2018) and Ding (2016) revealed that
the support services provided by the hosting universities to international students to help them
achieve successful cultural adjustment were inadequate and ineffective. Some international
students attributed the lack of interaction between Chinese students and international students to
the differences in cultural values and social styles (J. H. Yang, 2009). Miglietta (2009) pointed
out that multiple factors such as language competence, length of stay, previous overseas
experiences, students’ expectations and their knowledge of Chinese culture are likely to
determine whether the students have a satisfactory cultural adaptation experience in China.
In summary, international students have a strong desire and expectation to experience and
learn more about Chinese culture and make Chinese friends. However, language barriers,
perceived differences in social values and lifestyles, and the poor cultural services and support
provided by the universities may make it formidable. It is worth noting that all of the current
research literature on this topic found in English journals focused on international students
studying in Chinese public universities. No research published in English was conducted in the
context of an SFCU where the campus setting, the language of instruction, culture, and student
services are significantly different from Chinese public universities.
Measures to Improve Intercultural Integration
Researchers have given various recommendations for improving intercultural integration
of student groups. For example, Leask and Carroll (2011) argued that universities are not giving
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 45

due emphasis on going beyond “wishing and hoping” and taking strategic, deliberate and
informed actions as well as on-going reflective evaluations to improve social inclusion and
intercultural engagement. Meza and Gazzoli (2011) concurred on the suggestion of proactive
institutional interventions and argued that universities should become familiar with the cultures
of their international students in the first place to provide the supports needed. Schlossberg
(2011) noted that institutional support is of vital importance not only for international students to
integrate better but also for promoting their physical and psychological health.
Recommendations stemming from research can be summarized into three main
categories: curricular setting, extracurricular programming and intercultural advising, which are
discussed in detail below.
First, the curriculum should be internationalized, with specific tasks included that require
students to have intercultural collaboration (Bodycott et al., 2014). Harrison (2012) also
proposed more proactive management of classroom dynamics for more intercultural interactions.
In the study by Rienties et al. (2013), students learned to overcome initial cultural barriers when
“forced” to work together on multicultural teams to complete specific tasks. Specific courses on
cultural diversity can be offered, even required, to help students acquire cultural knowledge and
develop intercultural competence (Bowman, 2013). Multiple universities in Australia have
already modified their curricula to encourage students to have more intercultural experiences
(Leask & Carroll, 2011). Volet and Ang (2012) noted that it takes careful planning and
monitoring to have effective intercultural engagement during the course of academic study and
recommended regular intercultural teamwork evolving from highly structured tasks with set roles
to more open and creative assignments.
Second, adequate extracurricular programs should be in place to facilitate intercultural
engagement. It is crucial to align universities’ extra- and co-curricular activities with the formal
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 46

curriculum to help students achieve successful intercultural engagement (Leask & Carroll, 2011).
Bowman (2013) proposed that universities should develop a student service team with strong
professional abilities to create campus programs that facilitate the establishment of intercultural
ties among students. The research conducted in Korea by Jon (2013) showed that campus
programs that involved both Korean and international students had directly and positively
influenced intercultural interaction and supported the development of intercultural competence.
He pointed out that superficial intercultural contact might lead to even worse misunderstandings,
hence training and oriental programs on cultural diversity are necessary (Jon, 2013). After
studying Chinese Mainland students in Germany, H. Li (2017) recommended that universities
should organize more social events for faculty members and students to promote the social and
academic integration of international students. A peer support program that pairs international
students with voluntary domestic students who are encouraged to attend campus activities
together can also be instrumental (Yu, 2010). Similarly, Meza and Gazzoli (2011) pointed out
that sharing accommodation among students with different cultural backgrounds increases the
chances of better adaptation to new environment and less acculturative stress.
Third, effective intercultural advising must be offered. A competent academic advising
team can play a crucial role in helping all students be better prepared for a multicultural world
(Cornett-DeVito & Reeves, 1999). It was also recommended that academic advisors should
familiarize themselves with all the potential opportunities in both academic and extracurricular
settings that can help students build intercultural competence, and academic advisors should
model cultural differences into their interaction strategies with students from different
backgrounds (Cornett-DeVito & Reeves, 1999). Lin and Liu (2019) argued that universities’
student advising should transform from the traditional focus on the host country’s cultural
context to a broader approach of intercultural brokering.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 47

In summary, it was widely agreed among researchers that institutional interventions are
necessary and useful. Classes with intercultural elements, group learning, well-designed tasks
and projects, professional intercultural advising, social and extra-curricular activities, and shared
accommodation are most recommended.
The following section focuses on the gap analysis model by Clark and Estes (2002) and
discusses the KMO influences on intercultural integration among students in an SFCU.
Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences
Clark and Estes (2002) identified the three main causes of performance gaps: KMO
causes. Based on an adaptation of the gap analysis framework (Clark & Estes, 2002), the
following sections examined the KMO factors influencing students’ capacity to build
intercultural competence and become global citizens through effective intercultural interaction
and integration.
Knowledge and Skills
As a component of the gap analysis framework, it is necessary to determine whether
individuals know how (and when, what, why, where, and who) to achieve their performance
goals (Clark & Estes, 2002). Studies conducted in various countries have revealed that specific
knowledge and skills are needed for college students to have effective cultural adaptation and
intercultural integration. As argued by Michael (1997) and Deardorff (2006), knowledge of
others and self, and understanding and appreciation of cultural differences are considered core
elements of intercultural competence. Other researchers found that cultural knowledge and
language competency are essential predictors of sociocultural adaptation (R. P. Yang et al.,
2006). In order for students to develop global citizenship with intercultural competence, they
need knowledge of various cultures and skills to communicate and collaborate with classmates
from different cultural backgrounds effectively. For this study, to explore the students’
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 48

knowledge related to intercultural integration in a comprehensive manner, Krathwohl’s (2002)
framework was utilized.
Krathwohl (2002) identified four major types of knowledge: factual, conceptual,
procedural and metacognitive. Factual knowledge includes the basic elements, specific details
and terminology of a discipline. Conceptual knowledge means the interrelationships among the
fundamental elements within a more massive structure that enable them to function together,
such as categories, principles, theories and models (Krathwohl, 2002). Procedural knowledge
refers to the skills of being able to apply factual and conceptual knowledge, or simply how to do
something (Krathwohl, 2002). Metacognitive knowledge is the perception of cognitive
processes, awareness and knowledge of one’s own cognition (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011). A
study of each of the four knowledge influences provides a comprehensive understanding of the
students’ knowledge and skills required for effective intercultural integration.
Knowledge About Intercultural Competence (Conceptual)
To become global citizens and future leaders in various professions, students need to
have basic knowledge about the meaning of intercultural competence before they are able to
make a personal effort to achieve it. Deardorff (2006) studied the various definitions of
intercultural competence proposed by many scholars and found that there are three common
elements: (a) understanding and appreciation of cultural differences, (b) experiencing different
cultures, and (c) knowledge of one’s heritage culture. First, knowledge of cultural differences is
fundamental to effective intercultural interaction and communication. For example, a direct
communication style is more common in Western countries, but indirect communication with
nuance and subtlety is more acceptable in traditional Chinese culture (Y. Wang, 2004). In some
cases, the real message is implied or hidden between the lines because Chinese individuals often
consider it too blunt or disrespectful to state it explicitly (P. Yang, 2013). Unawareness of such
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 49

principal and sometimes very subtle cultural differences may trigger misunderstandings and
harm the formation of intercultural friendships. Second, personally experiencing different
cultures can help internalize knowledge of cultural differences. Students need to understand that
“knowing it” can only be meaningful when it is combined with “doing it.” Lastly, global
citizenship does not mean people must be detached from their heritage culture. At LUC, students
come from almost 30 different countries on four continents. Therefore, it is important to
understand the students’ knowledge and attitude about cultural differences as well as their
awareness of their own cultures.
Skills to Effectively Communicate and Collaborate With Classmates from Different Cultural
Backgrounds (Procedural)
Having cultural knowledge and awareness does not automatically mean successful
intercultural integration which is a process that takes sustained effort and skills. According to H
Spencer-Oatey, Dauber, and Williams (2014), integration is a process of “intermixing, personal
adaptation, synthesizing, mutual adjustment and change and a sense of belonging” (p. 9).
Williams (2005) reviewed the studies on intercultural communication skills and identified four
categories of most mentioned elements: flexibility and open-mindedness, cultural empathy,
personal strength and stability, and ability to deal with stress. Kim (1991) suggested that
intercultural communication skills result from cultural adaptability and include three dimensions:
cognitive competency to understand and interpret cultural differences, willingness or motivation
to accommodate, and ability to utilize the skills effectively. Ting-Toomey and Dorjee (2018)
defined intercultural communication competency as the ability to respectfully observe,
appropriately adapt to and react to other’s opinions or behaviors during the communication
process, or simply adaptability and sensitivity. By leveraging the resources and opportunities
provided by the university, students need to build their skills to effectively collaborate and
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 50

integrate with others from different cultural backgrounds through individualized strategies and
actions. This study explored the degree to which the students at LUC had mastered the skills to
effectively interact with classmates from different cultural backgrounds.
Self-reflecting and Evaluating Own Intercultural Competence and Using Individualized
Strategies and Actions to Improve (Metacognitive)
As discussed above, intercultural integration is a process that involves adjustment and
changes. During the process, students need to have the capacity to reflect on their experiences
and effort and evaluate how well their approaches or measures are working towards the goal of
developing intercultural competence. They need to learn from their observations of others’
successes or mistakes and internalize these observations into their own knowledge and skills.
Lysgaard (1955) and Trifonovitch (1977) pointed out that the initial “honeymoon” stage of
excitement is usually followed by a drop as a result of maladjustment or the “hostility” stage. To
get through this stage as soon as possible, students need to have the ability to engage in proactive
psychological and behavioral adjustment based on self-reflection and evaluation. Otherwise,
students may choose to disengage in intercultural interaction and stay inside their cultural
comfort zone. Intercultural integration is highly dependent on the students’ personal choices and
effort. Therefore, it is critical to understand how students are proactively adjusting their personal
strategies and actions to overcome the barriers to intercultural integration.
Table 4 presents the identified knowledge influences categorized by knowledge types that
are pertinent to students’ intercultural integration at LUC:

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 51

Table 4
Assumed Knowledge Influences
Assumed Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type
Knowledge about intercultural competence Declarative (Conceptual)
Skills to effectively communicate and collaborate with classmates from
different cultural backgrounds
Procedural

Self-reflecting and evaluating their own intercultural competence and
using individualized strategies and actions to improve.
Metacognitive

Motivation
According to Pintrich and Schunk (2002), motivation is a process of initiating and
maintaining the activities that are needed to reach a specific goal. It is crucial to study motivation
because it has a direct impact on individuals’ behavior and their chance of achieving a specific
goal (Clark & Estes, 2002; Rueda, 2011). As argued by Clark and Estes (2008), “motivation gets
us going, keeps us moving, and tells us how much effort to spend on work tasks” (p. 80). Most
motivation researchers agree that there are three main indices of motivated behavior: active
choice, persistence, and mental effort (Mayer, 2011; Rueda, 2011). Motivated individuals make
an active choice when they begin to pursue a specific goal, even if they did not select the goal
themselves (Clark & Estes, 2002). With motivation, people are able to persist in working toward
a specific goal despite distractions or obstacles during the process (Mayer, 2011; Rueda, 2011).
Finally, motivated individuals are more likely to invest adequate mental effort to achieve the
goal successfully. Mental effort is mostly determined by an individual’s confidence level (Clark
& Estes, 2002).
Motivated behaviors of choice, persistence and mental effort are influenced by a variety
of internal and external factors (Rueda, 2011). In the following paragraphs, three critical
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 52

motivational factors were identified and assumed to have an impact on LUC’s students’ capacity
to build intercultural competence: self-efficacy, utility value and intrinsic value.
Students’ Self-efficacy Related to Developing Intercultural Competence
As Bandura (1997) noted, “perceived self-efficacy refers to beliefs in one’s capabilities to
organize and execute the courses of action required to produce given attainments” (p. 3). When
people do not believe they can succeed at a specific goal, they are not likely to engage in the first
place (Clark & Estes, 2002). Rueda (2011) argues that the higher an individual’s self-efficacy,
the more motivated they will be to persist and invest mental effort. As discussed in previous
paragraphs, intercultural integration is a multi-stage process, and there are a variety of barriers to
effective intercultural integration. Cultivation of intercultural competence demands effort and
persistence. If a student does not have high self-efficacy in this context, when encountered with
some difficulties during intercultural interactions, he or she might quickly disengage and fall into
“passive xenophobia” as described by Harrison and Peacock (2010). Bandura (1997) noted that
task-specific confidence is more important and relevant to reaching a specific goal than general
confidence. Therefore, even if all LUC’s undergraduate students are likely to have high levels of
self-confidence given the fact that they have been successfully admitted by LUC in a highly
selective admissions process, they need to believe that effective intercultural integration could be
a challenging and even painful process, but it is a realistic and achievable goal.
Students’ Value for Intercultural Competence in Increasing Their Academic Performance
and Employability
Utility value means that people choosing to do something because they desire the benefits
associated with completing the task, rather than because they enjoy it or excel at it (Clark &
Estes, 2002). For students to make an effort to overcome cultural barriers and to interact and
integrate with classmates, they need to understand and recognize the benefits of doing it.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 53

Researchers have found that intercultural integration is positively correlated with students’
academic performance and future employability (Cotton et al., 2013; Rienties et al., 2012; Helen
Spencer-Oatey et al., 2017). It is crucial to explore whether students at LUC are aware of these
benefits and the degree to which they value them. For some, intercultural integration could be a
stressful and challenging process. Seeing the benefits of the invested effort and the downside of
not doing it is a critical motivational factor to be explored.
Students’ Inherent Interest in Learning and Experiencing Different Cultures
Intrinsic value refers to whether individuals are interested in mastering a new skill or
adding to their expertise (Clark & Estes, 2002). The satisfaction comes from the process of
performing the task rather than from any specific outcome of the task (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).
It will be easier and quicker for individuals to engage with tasks if the tasks interest them or if
they simply enjoy the process of engagement (Clark & Estes, 2002). LUC is a new model of
university established in China and has attracted applications from more than 80 countries. It is
reasonable to hypothesize that the students who chose to have their college education at LUC
have a relatively keen interest in learning and experiencing different cultures on the globalized
campus. This study explored how much this interest had been working as a motivational factor
for students to engage in intercultural interaction and integration.
Table 5 below shows the three assumed motivation influences categorized by motivation
construct that may influence students’ ability to build intercultural competence through
intercultural integration.

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 54

Table 5
Assumed Motivation Influences
Motivation Construct Assumed Motivation Influence
Self-efficacy Students need to believe they are able to develop intercultural
competence through interactions and collaborations with
classmates
Utility Value Students need to see the value of intercultural competence in
increasing their academic performance and employability
Intrinsic Value Students need to have an inherent interest in and enjoyment of
learning and experiencing different cultures through
intercultural interactions with classmates

Organizational Influences
Clark and Estes (2002) argued that, in addition to knowledge and motivations, the
support of adequate and appropriate resources and processes within the organization has a
critical role in enabling or hindering individuals’ success. Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001)
introduced the concepts of cultural models and cultural settings as the two dimensions of
organizational culture that impact the individuals within organizations. Basically, cultural models
mean the shared understanding of how things work or should work within an organization.
Cultural models are dynamic, usually invisible and expressed through specific cultural practices
such as rules and behaviors (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Cultural settings can be
understood as the visible, specific and concrete components or contexts of an organization’s
culture (Rueda, 2011). It is important to understand how an organization’s cultural model and
cultural settings have influenced the realization of individual goals. In this study, the impact of
organizational influences from the perspectives of both the invisible organizational culture and
the more visible aspects of the organization on the students’ capacity to have effective
intercultural interactions needs to be explored. In the following paragraphs, three organizational
influences categorized by cultural models and settings were identified as most relevant to
supporting students’ intercultural integration and cultivation of intercultural competence at LUC.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 55

An Organizational Culture of Embracing Cultural Diversity and Encouraging Intercultural
Integration (Cultural Model)
Cultural models represent the underlying general values, beliefs and attitudes that dictate
the structure, practices and policies of an organization (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Rueda,
2011). Behavioral theories of learning emphasize the importance for an organization to build an
environment that fosters desirable behaviors (Tuckman, 2006) which would be strengthened if
reinforced (Daly, 2006). According to Merriam and Tisdell (2015), students’ motivation toward
a specific goal is likely to be enhanced if they perceive the environment as supportive.
LUC’s mission statement emphasizes pluralism and cross-cultural understanding and
collaboration. The student body and faculty are highly international. However, this does not
necessarily mean that there is a campus-wide culture of valuing diversity and intercultural
integration. To empower the students to engage in intercultural interactions effectively, LUC
needs to establish a university-wide culture that clearly values and promotes cultural diversity as
well as an environment that makes students feel supported and encouraged to engage in
intercultural communications and activities. As discussed above, a cultural model is usually
invisible and expressed as a shared understanding among people within the organization. Hence,
for this study, it is important to understand from the students’ perspective whether there is such a
supportive and encouraging culture at LUC and to what degree this culture has positively
impacted their motivations for intercultural integration.
A Classroom Climate that Encourages and Facilitates Students’ Intercultural Integration
(cultural setting)
Merriam and Tisdell (2015) argued that classrooms are not only intellectual but also
social and emotional environments where students’ learning and development are influenced by
the classroom climate which is defined as “the intellectual, social, emotional, and physical
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 56

environments in which our students learn” (p. 170). They suggest that instructors be more
intentional in shaping the course climate for the desired learning outcome. To help students grow
into global citizens, it is critical to have a classroom climate that not only promotes cultural
diversity and pluralism but also encourages and facilitates intercultural integration. Merriam and
Tisdell (2015) identified four essential aspects of classroom climate: stereotypes, tone, faculty-
student and student-student interactions, and course content. For this study, it is beneficial to
understand and assess the degree to which students perceive the classroom climate at LUC as
supporting intercultural integration.
Effective Extracurricular Programs and Activities That Promote Intercultural Integration
(Cultural Setting)
There is evidence from numerous studies that constructive extracurricular activities have
a positive impact on academic achievement and other aspects of the development of adolescent
students (Eccles, Barber, Stone, & Hunt, 2003). Pascarella, Wolniak, Seifert, Cruce, and Blaich
(2005) pointed out that more in-depth involvement in extracurricular activities is one of the
advantages of liberal arts colleges. Active engagement in extracurricular programs and activities
also benefit the integration of domestic and international students (Peacock & Harrison, 2009).
LUC has adopted the liberal arts education model for its undergraduate education. Therefore, it is
sensible to hypothesize that LUC gives priority to extracurricular programs and activities. This
study explored answers to the following questions: Are the extracurricular programs and
activities planned and designed in a way to facilitate students’ intercultural integration? Do the
students perceive that extracurricular programming is adequate? How well are the existing
programs and activities working for the students? Answers from students’ perspectives are
helpful for evaluating the impact of this organizational influence.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 57

Table 6 shows the three organizational influences that influence student development of
intercultural competence through intercultural interactions and collaborations.
Table 6
Assumed Organizational Influences
Category Assumed Organizational Influences
Cultural Model Influence The school needs to cultivate a culture of embracing cultural
diversity and encouraging intercultural integration
Cultural Setting Influence 1 The school needs to establish a classroom climate that encourages
and facilitates students’ intercultural integration
Cultural Setting Influence 2 The school needs to provide students with effective
extracurricular programs and activities promoting intercultural
integration among students
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 58

CHAPTER THREE: METHODS
This study sought to understand students’ intercultural integration at LUC and evaluate
how well the policies and practices of LUC are supporting the undergraduate students to develop
intercultural competence. In this chapter, the overall research design and methods proposed for
data collection and analysis were presented and discussed. The gap analysis framework by Clark
and Estes (2002) was used to guide the study. The study focused on the key stakeholder group of
undergraduate students. The focus of the analysis was the KMO influences that are related to the
students’ intercultural integration.
Three research questions guided this study:
1. What are the undergraduate students’ knowledge and motivation related to achieving
high intercultural competence through intercultural integration?
2. How does LUC support the students’ knowledge and motivation to pursue intercultural
integration outcomes?
3. What are the recommendations for LUC to improve its organizational practice in the
areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources?
To answer the research questions, a mixed-methods approach was adopted, using
interviews and surveys to collect qualitative and quantitative data. In the following paragraphs,
the sampling strategy and rationale, design of the research instruments, the data collection
process, data analysis methods, credibility and trustworthiness, research ethics, and limitations
and delimitations were discussed.
Study Participants
The stakeholder group of focus for this study was the undergraduate students at LUC.
Taking into consideration that the current freshman class merely had less than two months of on-
campus experiences by the time the interviews and surveys were implemented, I solely focused
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 59

on the sophomore class of undergraduate students, which was the inaugural class of LUC’s
undergraduate degree education. There were 256 active students enrolled in the class and all of
them were invited to take an online survey, which could either be taken on a computer or
cellphone. I also conducted face-to-face interviews with purposefully selected students for more
in-depth information collection.
Survey Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
The total number of students in the sophomore class was 256, which was an appropriate
and manageable quantity for a quantitative online survey. The percentage of international
students in this class was about 30%, with students from 26 countries on four continents.
Approximately one-half of the international students were from the United States. Since the
study was about the integration of students from different cultural backgrounds, it was important
to have the perspectives of enough international students from different countries, in addition to
the Chinese students. Therefore, I invited all of the students in the sophomore class to participate
in the online survey.
The survey invitation was sent to the students by emails sent from the Registrar’s Office,
with a URL of the online survey in early September, the beginning of the data collection process.
Students did not have any classes scheduled during Fridays and weekends. Fridays were usually
reserved for field trips or other group extracurricular events. Therefore, distributing the survey
on Saturday was likely to result in an optimal response rate. Even though the survey was not
directly related to their academic performance and would not have any personal impact, it was
still anonymous to make sure that students would give their most honest answers. To encourage
more students to participate, four Kindles were offered as prizes for four survey participants who
were selected by lottery.

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 60

Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
In this study, I adopted the “maximum variation” strategy (Glaser, 1967) of purposeful
sampling for interviews. Patton (2015) argued that “any common patterns that emerge from great
variation are of particular interest and value in capturing the core experiences and central shared
dimensions of a setting or phenomenon” (p. 283). To get a more comprehensive picture and
insights from a different lens, I purposefully selected candidates for interviews basing on specific
criteria related to nationality, geography, gender and economic development levels of their
countries of origin. I conducted 15 interviews with students from four groups: (1) China; (2) the
United States; (3) OECD countries other than the US; (4) Developing countries other than China.
Given the vast variances in cultural and economic backgrounds of the countries in the above
groups, students in these groups were likely to have different perceptions, expectations and
behaviors associated with intercultural integration.
To capture a more holistic and comprehensive picture, I invited students from all of the
four groups to participate in the interviews. As there were more students in specific groups and
less in others, the specific numbers of interviews conducted for each group were different. In
addition, I invited the four students (two Chinese and two international students) who were
serving on LUC’s DIAB because they were most directly engaged in the issues related to
intercultural integration and would have significant insights to contribute. Also, their service on
DIAB would allow them to have more knowledge about the institutional strategies or initiatives
on this issue. Therefore, 15 interviews were conducted. The wide variation of the backgrounds of
the 15 interview participants would be likely to provide a more holistic understanding of the
situation from different cultural perspectives. The gender balance of the interview participants
was also considered during the process.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 61

Online surveys were implemented first, and the final two items asked students to choose
whether they would like to be invited to have a face-to-face interview on the topic. After the
survey was closed, I purposefully selected candidates, following the sampling criteria, for
interviews from those who indicated their willingness in the survey. Although I was confident
that students would be enthusiastic about participating in the interview, in case there were not
enough volunteers who met the sampling criteria, I entrusted the registrar’s office to select and
invite interview candidates following the criteria provided by me. The candidates were invited
one by one through emails. If someone turned down the invitation, other candidates who met the
same criteria were invited until the planned number of interviews was reached. The four students
serving on DIAB were invited through the Registrar’s Office as well. Given their duty as
members of DIAB, all of them were likely to accept the interview invitations. If any of the four
turned down the invitation, no additional invitations were needed to be sent to any other students.
Criterion 1. Currently enrolled undergraduate students in the sophomore class at LUC by
September 2019. There were no upper classes and the freshman class did not have enough
campus experiences.
Criterion 2a. Four students from China: two males and two females to ensure equal
gender representation. Taking into consideration that Chinese Mainland students accounted for
about two-thirds of the whole class and the cultural variance in China, four was an appropriate
number for interviews.
Criterion 2b. Three students from the United States: one male and two females to reflect
the gender ratio of this group. Students from the US accounted for 14% of the whole class.
Criterion 2c. Two students from OECD countries other than the United States: one male
and one female for equal gender representation. OECD countries other than the US might have
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 62

very different cultural attitudes and behaviors, so it was important to have their voices heard.
These students accounted for about 5% of the class.
Criterion 2d. Two students from developing countries other than China. One male and
one female for equal gender representation. Students from developing countries other than China
might have very different cultural perspectives and expectations than international students from
developed countries. These students accounted for about 12% of the class.
Criterion 2e. Four students who were serving on LUC’s DIAB. By volunteering to serve
on DIAB, these four students might be very insightful on cultural diversity and integration. Their
willingness to share and to make an impact was also desired for in-depth interviews.
Instrumentation and Data Collection Procedure
To evaluate the assumed KMO influences related to students’ intercultural integration at
LUC, both surveys and interviews were used to collect data. The purpose of the survey was
about understanding students’ knowledge and motivation related to intercultural integration and
their perception of the university’s influences in this regard, and developing recommendations
for the university leadership for improvement, so the students were likely to be enthusiastic in
filling out the surveys. Interviews would provide in-depth and rich information about the KMO
influences to help understand and interpret students’ behaviors and opinions about intercultural
integration as well as its relationship to intercultural competence.
Surveys
As Creswell and Creswell (2017) noted, surveys are effective in answering descriptive
questions about the attitudes and opinions of a population. Surveys can be carried out in a low-
cost and convenient way while covering a relatively large population. Using online survey tools
such as Qualtrics provides multiple advantages such as easiness to create and distribute, real-time
status reports and data analysis. Since the study seeks to understand and evaluate the intercultural
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 63

integration of students, it is important to collect information about the opinions and perceptions
of students from different countries and cultural backgrounds about intercultural competence and
how to integrate with classmates effectively. However, it was not realistic to have in-depth and
face-to-face interviews with all 256 students in the class. Students’ attitudes toward intercultural
integration and their intercultural behaviors might be influenced by a variety of factors such as
the heritage culture, diversity experiences, education and socioeconomic environment of their
countries of origin. Hence the breadth of the research data would be of vital importance to make
sure the conclusions are not skewed by the limited number of interviews. Therefore, inviting all
students in the class to participate in a survey and collecting responses from as many as possible
would be a very sensible research method.
After comparing a few online survey tools, I chose to administer my surveys through
Qualtrics. A URL address of the survey was included in the invitation emails sent to the students
who could take the surveys using computers or smartphones. All survey questions were in
English only. Since the language of instruction at LUC is English, all undergraduate students
were expected to have the required English proficiency to complete the surveys. Furthermore,
the questions in the surveys were worded in a way to minimize potential language barriers for
students who were not native English speakers.
There were 42 items in the survey. The three items at the beginning were about consent
form and demographic information, including gender and nationality. The two items at the end
asked students whether they were willing to be invited to participate in an in-person interview.
The remaining 37 items are dedicated to assessing the assumed KMO influences, as discussed in
Chapter Two. Each of the nine influences was corresponded with multiple items in the survey to
ensure validity. Among the 37 items related to KMO, there was one item that required
participants to rank a number of factors and another item for offering their suggestions in a text
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 64

box. The remaining 35 items were formatted as statements with a 6-point Likert-type scale,
including strongly agree, agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree, disagree and strongly
disagree. Among the 35 Likert-type items, one was from a tested instrument developed by
Arasaratnam (2009) to measure intercultural communication competence, and four were from a
tested instrument developed by G. Chen and Starosta (2000) to measure intercultural sensitivity.
To achieve a response rate as high as possible, I carefully selected the date and specific
time to send out the invitations by email so that they could catch the most attention from
recipients. The invitation email was drafted in a way that was clear, succinct and encouraging,
highlighting the importance of the research for LUC’s development and the potential to better
facilitate the development of their intercultural competence in the future. It was also noted in the
invitation that the survey was anonymous, would take no more than 12 minutes based on the
pilot results, and all participants would enter a lottery to win one out of four Kindles. A reminder
email was sent the next Saturday for a better response rate.
Interviews
One face-to-face interview was conducted with each participant, so the total interviews
conducted was 15. All interviews were formal and took place in a small private meeting room at
LUC. English was used for all interviews. Upon permission by the interview participants, the
interview process was audio-recorded and professionally transcribed. I also took notes during the
interviews to help me capture the key messages and perform initial analysis during the
interviews. All interviews last from 20 minutes to about 60 minutes.
A semi-structured protocol was utilized to guide the interview process. As defined by
Merriam and Tisdell (2015), a semi-structured interview is guided by a list of flexibly worded
questions targeting specific issues to be explored and allows the interviewer to respond to ideas
and information that emerge from the interviews. For this study, I focused my interview
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 65

conversations on exploring and understanding how the assumed KMO influences impacted
students’ intercultural integration. Surveys are not effective in validating the knowledge
influences, but interviews could allow me to explore, follow up and dive into students’ responses
and opinions which are likely to be quite different given their different cultural backgrounds.
Therefore, a semi-structured interview was most appropriate for this study. Patton (2015)
categorized interview questions into six types: experience and behavior, opinion and values,
feeling, knowledge, sensory, and background questions. To better understand students’
knowledge, experience and attitude related to intercultural integration at LUC, the interview
questions mainly included four types: experience and behavior, opinion and values, feeling, and
knowledge. The combination of these different types of questions would help generate targeted
data and information associated with the assumed KMO influences to answer the research
questions of this study. The surveys would provide breadth and quantitative data, and the
interviews would provide more in-depth qualitative data. The data from surveys and interviews
about the same influences could be used to triangulate for better data integrity. A mixed-method
of combining surveys and interviews would be likely to generate more holistic, accurate and
robust findings.
Data Analysis
For the survey data, frequencies of the responses to each question were calculated, and
the results based on all responses were presented in tables and charts. Means and standard
deviations were presented to identify average levels of responses. More analyses based on
geographic, economic, gender and other dimensions were also performed to generate more
comparative insights. After the surveys were closed, descriptive statistical analysis was
performed on the submitted surveys.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 66

For interviews, data analysis began during data collection. I wrote analytic memos after
each interview. I also documented my thoughts, concerns, and initial conclusions about the data
concerning my conceptual framework and research questions. Once all planned interviews were
completed, they were transcribed through professional services and coded. In the first phase of
analysis, I used open coding, looking for empirical codes and applying a priori codes from the
conceptual framework of gap analysis proposed by Clark and Estes (2002). The second phase of
analysis was performed where empirical and a priori codes were consolidated into analytic/axial
codes. In the third phase of data analysis, I identified pattern codes and themes that emerged in
relation to the conceptual framework and study questions.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Qualitative researchers need to confront the challenges of the credibility of their research
which is fundamentally about how the findings of the research reflect reality (Merriam and
Tisdell (2015). Maxwell (2012) noted that reality is a relative concept and can never truly be
captured or proven by people. However, it is still a crucial job for qualitative researchers to apply
strategies to achieve high credibility for their research findings which best reflect the research
participants’ opinions (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). For this study, I tried to ensure high credibility
through the following techniques recommended by Merriam and Tisdell (2015). The first
strategy is triangulation which enhances credibility by showing that a specific research finding is
identified through comparison and analysis of data acquired from multiple methods or resources
(Patton, 2015). I used two research methods, surveys and interviews, for the study so that the
assumed KMO influences would be explored and validated in different ways. For both surveys
and interviews, multiple questions related to each influence were asked so that the findings or
responses could be crosschecked and confirmed. The second strategy was member checks which
means preliminary findings, particularly those with ambiguity, were shared with the interview
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 67

participants for verification and validation so that misunderstanding or misinterpretation could be
avoided (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015).I summarized the key findings of each interview and sent to
the interview participants to solicit their feedback on potential inaccuracies. The third strategy
was adequate engagement in data collection. In addition to conducting 15 face-to-face interviews
all by myself, I also purposefully selected the interview candidates with diverse cultural
backgrounds following the idea of seeking variation. The fourth strategy was about reflexivity
which is about how the researcher and the research process affect each other (Probst & Berenson,
2014). As a primary instrument of a qualitative study, the researcher might have inherent biases
that could potentially influence the study in various ways (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). For this
study, these biases, or subjectivity of researchers (Maxwell, 2012), might come from my race,
gender, age, socioeconomic status, cultural and educational background, and employment
relationship with LUC. For example, as a Chinese, I might take it for granted that it is difficult
for Chinese or Asian students to effectively socialize with students who are native English
speakers due to language difficulties I have personally experienced years ago. Given the reality
that it is impossible to totally remove the researcher’s existing theories, beliefs and
preconceptions (Maxwell, 2012), I tried to minimize the potential impact of these biases through
serious self-reflection on my knowledge about the topics of cultural differences and cross-
cultural sensitivity. During the process of data collection and analysis, I reminded myself to be
open-minded and unbiased. As a Chinese who received higher education in both China and the
United States and worked in multi-cultural environment for years, I leveraged my personal
experiences to best understand and interpret data without biases. My education at USC’s Rossier
School of Education also enabled me to master the knowledge and techniques of conducting
interviews in a way that minimized the researcher’s biases.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 68

As Glesne (2015) noted, researchers will inevitably develop relationships with research
participants regardless of how researchers view their roles. Therefore, it is essential to consider
my personal role in the research consciously. I am a member of the senior administration team at
LUC and have been working for the organization since it was founded. However, my duties at
LUC are not directly associated with academic affairs or student affairs, which means that I am
not involved in the performance assessment of students and have no influence on it. A critical
goal of the study was to give recommendations to the leadership team at LUC so that the
university can do a better job of helping students to develop intercultural competence and
become global citizens. I did not have personal interests in the results of the study. A clear
explanation of the purpose of the study and transparency in all communications with the
participants helped eliminate the potential confusion on my role in the study.
Ethics
Merriam and Tisdell (2015) argued that, in all research, we must have confidence in the
study’s integrity which counts on the ethical standards the researcher follows. As Stake (2005)
pointed out, “Qualitative researchers are guests in the private space of the world. Their manners
should be good and their code of ethics strict” (p.459). I, as a qualitative researcher in this study,
considered the major ethical items based on recommendations from Merriam and Tisdell (2015).
The following paragraphs highlight the key ethical considerations in this study.
Explaining the Purpose of the Inquiry and Methods
During a face-to-face meeting with the executive vice president (EVP) of LUC, I
explained the reasons I wanted to study the intercultural integration of students at LUC and why
the results would be meaningful for not only LUC but also other SFCUs in China. I also talked
about the research methods I would like to apply (i.e., online survey for the sophomore class of
undergraduate students, face-to-face interviews with purposefully selected students from
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 69

different cultural backgrounds). I also made it clear that the study was a part of my dissertation
effort at the University of Southern California. The EVP gave his approval and full endorsement
for conducting the study. I also talked to the leader of the student affairs department at LUC and
gained his support. At the beginning of the data collection process, invitation emails were sent to
students in the sophomore class to invite them to participate in the online survey. The email
included a brief explanation of the purpose of the study and a statement that their participation
was on a voluntary and anonymous basis. Similar information was included in the invitation
emails sent to purposefully selected candidates for face-to-face interviews, with promises on
confidentiality. At the beginning of each interview, I also briefly introduced the purpose of the
study.
Study Information for Participants
For all participants who were interviewed on a face-to-face basis, I briefly introduced the
purpose of the study again, shared the information sheet and acquired their oral consent before
the interviews started. Besides, separate oral permission on recording the interview conversations
was also acquired. Interview participants could refuse to answer any questions asked by the
interviewer without any consequence. Interview participants could also request to stop the
interview at any time or withdraw from the interview without leaving any record. For the online
Qualtrics surveys, the cover page served as the consent form in which the information sheet was
imbedded. All participants must read and click “Agree” before they could start taking the online
surveys.
Reciprocity
Glazer (1982) defines reciprocity as “the exchange of favors and commitments, the
building of a sense of mutual identification and feeling of community” (p. 50). Glesne (2015)
pointed out that the meaning of reciprocity in qualitative research is more than rewarding
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 70

research participants monetarily. It is also important to make them value what you do. This study
aimed to understand and evaluate the current situation of intercultural integration of students
from different countries and cultural backgrounds to give recommendations. The study would
allow students to voice out their feelings and perceptions and give recommendations for
improvement from their own perspectives. The result of the study would also be likely to enable
positive changes in terms of intercultural integration at LUC as an indirect benefit to the
participating students. Therefore, I was confident that students would acknowledge the value of
the research and be enthusiastic about participating in the study and give their honest input. To
have a response rate as high as possible, I offered four Kindles as prizes of a lottery which
survey participants could choose to enter. Coupons with a face value of 20-Yuan which could be
used at the university’s cafeteria were offered to interview participants upon completion of the
interviews.
Confidentiality and Anonymity
All interviews took place in private rooms with only the researcher and the interview
participant. Audio recordings and electronic transcripts were only kept on my personal computer
which was protected by passwords and would not be shared with any other research participants.
Interview data were used without disclosing the participants’ identities. Pseudonyms were used
for all interview participants. It was also noted in the information sheet that confidentiality would
be strictly protected.
The invitation emails were sent to the students from the registrar’s office of LUC. The
invitation emails carried one URL address of the Qualtrics survey so that the submitted surveys
could not be traced to an individual participant. The online survey did not require participants to
specify their names or contact information unless they volunteer to participate in interviews by
checking the final item in the survey. Pseudonyms were assigned to all interview participants to
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 71

protect confidentiality. Students could choose not to disclose their gender and nationality. Survey
data were only presented in aggregated form.
Ethical Advice and Institutional Review Board
As the researcher, I sought ethical advice from Dr. Tracy Tambascia, who is a professor
at USC’s Rossier School of Education and my dissertation chair, as well as other members
serving on my dissertation committee. This study also acquired approvals from both the IRB of
USC and the IRB of LUC.
Limitations and Delimitations
Limitations mean those matters or issues occurring in the process of the study that are
beyond the researcher’s control (Simon & Goes, 2013). There were anticipated limitations in this
study as well. Firstly, the online surveys and interviews depended on self-reported data, which
means that I was not able to control whether the participants’ responses reflected the truth or
their true feelings. Given the research topic of intercultural integration, social desirability might
play a role when students try to appear to be more “politically correct” in answering survey and
interview questions. Also, there was a possibility that some students might not take all the survey
questions seriously. Secondly, this study solely focused on one stakeholder group (the students)
due to considerations of practicality, which means that opinions and observations of other key
stakeholder groups such as the faculty team and the student affairs staff were not included and
studied. Thirdly, the study focused on the sophomore class of undergraduate students who
merely had one-year experience on LUC’s campus. Their intercultural experiences so far might
not represent the whole picture of a 4-year, on-campus experience. Also, their attitudes and
competence in terms of intercultural integration might evolve so that the result of the study might
be different if it were conducted at a future point of time.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 72

Delimitations refer to the characteristics that defined the boundaries of a study as a result
of the researcher’s specific choices (Simon & Goes, 2013). The key delimitations of this study
included the following. Firstly, limiting the research focus on the sophomore class of
undergraduate students at LUC was a choice made by the researcher after taking into
consideration of the facts that the sophomore class was the only class with more than one year of
campus experience at LUC, and that students were the ultimate beneficiaries of this study.
Secondly, the assumed KMO influences were identified and chosen based on the consideration
that they must be appropriate for exploring, understanding and validating through the students’
perspectives. Thirdly, due to the need to include more cultural perspectives and the appropriate
size of the student population, I decided to use both surveys and interviews for this study.

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 73

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
The goal of this study is to evaluate the degree to which LUC is achieving its goal of
building an ecological system that fosters student’s intercultural competence through interactions
and integration with classmates from various cultural backgrounds. The gap analysis framework
by Clark and Estes (2002) was applied to validate the assumed influences by evaluating the gaps
between actual performance and desired performance goals through the examination of
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences. The validity of the assumed influences
was analyzed using data collected from an anonymous online survey and individual interviews.
Chapter Two discussed the identification of assumed KMO influences through an in-
depth review of the existing literature. Chapter Three presented details about the conceptual
framework, methodology and research plan for this study. Findings from data analysis are
presented in this chapter and organized in the categories of knowledge, motivation, and
organization, with a synthesis in the end. The following three questions guided this evaluation
study:
1. What are the undergraduate students’ knowledge and motivation related to achieving
high intercultural competence through intercultural integration?
2. How does LUC support the students’ knowledge and motivation to pursue intercultural
integration outcomes?
3. What are the recommendations for LUC to improve its organizational practice in the
areas of knowledge, motivation, and organizational resources?
Participating Stakeholders
This study focused on the stakeholder group of undergraduate students in the sophomore
class because it was the only class at LUC that had more than one year of on-campus experience.
There were 256 active students enrolled in the sophomore class coming from 27 countries.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 74

Survey Participants
The survey data for this study were collected from 112 (n = 112) responses to an online
survey distributed to all of the 256 (response rate = 43.8%) enrolled students in the sophomore
class at LUC. Data collection for the survey occurred over two weeks. Descriptive statistics of
survey participants (n = 112) by gender and nationality are listed in Table 7. Sixty-eight percent
of the survey participants are Chinese students, and the rest are international students. Sixty-nine
percent of the survey participants are females. Table 7 shows that the gender and nationality of
the survey participants reflected the whole population, which means the representativeness of the
survey participants is fair.
Table 7
Descriptive Statistics of Survey Participants (N=112)
Survey Participants Population
Number Percentage Percentage
Gender
Male 35 31% 36%
Female 77 69% 64%
Nationality
China 76 68% 70%
United States 17 15% 13%
Other 19 17% 17%

It is worth noting that survey participants were asked to identify themselves as students
from China, or the United States or other countries. For survey data analysis in the following
sections, data are presented in two ways: bar charts for all participants and bar charts by three
nationality groups (China, the United States and Other countries). It would be ideal if adequate
data were available to be analyzed by individual countries. However, the total number of non-US
survey participants was only 19, and most of them were the sole representatives of their own
countries, which made an analysis based on each country statistically meaningless. It is also well
recognized that given the cultural diversity among countries other than China and the US,
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 75

grouping these countries together might not be the best way for analysis. However, taking into
consideration that Chinese students and the US students are the two dominant cultural groups at
LUC, which is co-founded by a Chinese university and an American university, it is sensible to
separate out China and the US for comparative analysis. As a result, survey participants from
other countries form a third group called “Other International.” It has particular merits to analyze
survey data based on these three nationality groups, but by no means does the data analysis
imply that students from countries other than China and the United States should be considered a
homogeneous cultural group.
Interview Participants
Out of the 112 survey participants, 55 indicated their willingness to participate in an in-
person interview regarding the research topic and provided their contact information. Thirteen of
the 55 volunteers were selected using the sampling criteria described in Chapter Three. In
addition, three students who served on LUC’s DIAB were also invited. One of them was not able
to participate in the interview, so in total, 15 interviews were conducted. All interviews were
conducted in a meeting room on campus in three weeks after the survey was closed. The duration
of the semi-structured interviews ranged from 20 minutes to one hour. A meal coupon of 30
Yuan was offered to each interview participant after the interview was over as a token of
appreciation for their spirit of sharing. All of the interviews were transcribed through an online
professional transcription service.
Table 8 shows the demographic information of the interview participants. For
confidentiality and easy reference, pseudonyms were assigned to the interview participants.
Since all of the interview participants were sophomores, the ages of the participants were
between 18 and 20 years.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 76

Table 8
Demographic Information of Interview Participants (N=15)
Variable Pseudonym Gender
China
China-F-1 Female
China-F-2 Female
China-F-3 Female
China-F-4 Female
China-M-1 Male
China-M-2 Male
United States
US-F-1 Female
US-F-2 Female
US-M-1 Male
Other OECD Countries
OECD-F-1 Female
OECD-M-1 Male
Other Developing Countries
DC-F-1 Female
DC-M-1 Male
DC-M-2 Male
DC-M-3 Male

In the following section, findings generated from analysis of the survey and interviews
are presented in subsections of knowledge, motivation and organization. Under each subsection,
the assumed influences, as discussed in Chapter Two, are validated one by one through the
findings from the research. A summarized analysis is provided in the end.
Knowledge Findings
One of the research questions for this study is to examine whether the undergraduate
students at LUC had adequate knowledge that could prepare them to achieve better integration
with classmates from different cultural backgrounds. According to Bloom (1956), knowledge
includes four different types of constructs: factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. In
this study, the knowledge constructs of conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive were explored
to evaluate knowledge gaps as related to the research questions.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 77

In the following sections, survey data are presented in bar charts with means and standard
deviations. For survey items with a six-point Likert-type scale, scores assigned to “Strongly
Agree,” “Agree,” “Somewhat Agree,” “Somewhat Disagree,” “Disagree” and “Strongly
Disagree” are 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 and 1. To ensure consistency of presentation of means and standard
deviations, several survey items negatively related to intercultural integration are reverse-scored.
As discussed in Chapter Two, three knowledge influences were identified and assumed to
impact students’ intercultural integration at LUC: knowledge about intercultural competence,
skills to communicate and collaborate, and self-reflecting abilities for improvement effectively.
The following criteria are utilized to determine whether students at LUC had the knowledge and
skills required for intercultural integration. For a survey item related to specific knowledge
influences to be validated, the mean scores (where applicable) were no less than 4.0 for all
participants and no less than 3.5 for each of the three respective nationality groups. For an
influence to be validated in the interview data, participant responses must have been clearly
affirmative. When both of the criteria are fulfilled, the influence was considered validated. Based
on analysis of the research findings, two of the three assumed influences were validated, and one
was partially validated. Table 9 provides an overview of the key findings summarized from
survey and interview results and how the findings are tied to the influences.
Table 9
Assumed Knowledge Influences, Findings and Validation
Assumed Influences Findings Validated
Partially
Validated
Not
Validated
Knowledge about
intercultural competence
(conceptual)
1. Participants demonstrated
awareness of cultural differences
2. Participants acknowledged that
major cultural distance exists
between Chinese and international
students
√
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 78

3. Participants had a good
understanding of key factors
needed for better intercultural
integration
4. Participants had different levels of
intercultural knowledge or
experiences before LUC
Skills to effectively
communicate and
collaborate with
classmates from
different cultural
backgrounds
(procedural)
1. Participants were confident about
their current ability of
intercultural interactions
2. Participants made proactive
efforts to adapt
3. Participants were able to tolerate
cultural differences and find
common ground
√
Self-reflecting and
evaluating own
intercultural competence
and use individualized
strategies and actions to
improve (metacognitive)
1. Participants were able to reflect
on their intercultural experiences
for improvement
2. Participants recognized the
importance of personal effort and
preference
√
Knowledge About Intercultural Competence
Students need to have adequate knowledge about what intercultural competence means
before they are able to make personal efforts to achieve it through intercultural integration. As
summarized by Deardorff (2006), there are three common elements in the definition of
intercultural competence: (a) understanding and appreciation of cultural differences, (b)
experiencing different cultures, and (c) knowledge of one’s own heritage culture. Based on this
definition, specific survey items and interview questions were developed and adopted in the
research to validate this knowledge influence. Four findings related to this influence were
identified and discussed below.
Finding 1: Students Demonstrated Awareness of Cultural Differences
The survey data found that 85.7% of participants agreed or strongly agreed that people
from different cultural backgrounds might have different beliefs and values (Figure 1), which
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 79

indicates that survey participants as a whole had a very high level of awareness of differences
among cultures. Among the three nationality groups, the responses from survey participants from
China and the United States had similar means and standard deviations. In contrast, Other
International survey participants reported somewhat lower mean and standard deviation, which
probably means that non-US international students were a little bit less sensitive to cultural
differences.

Figure 1. People who are from a different cultural background than me may have different
beliefs and values.

36.6%
49.1%
11.6%
2.7%
0.0% 0.0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 5.20
Std.D: 0.74
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 80

Figure 2. People who are from a different cultural background than me may have different
beliefs and values (by nationality group).

Eighty-three percent of survey participants agreed or strongly agreed that “it is important
to know about the cultural or ethnic backgrounds of my classmates” (Figure 3). Among the three
nationality groups, United States participants presented the highest mean and lowest standard
deviation (Figure 4). The survey data from these two questions show that students at LUC,
especially those from the United States, had a high level of awareness of cultural differences and
recognized the importance of cultural knowledge.

Figure 3. It is important to know about the cultural backgrounds of my classmates.
38.2%
48.7%
10.5%
2.6%
0%
36.8% 36.8%
21.1%
5.3%
0%
29.4%
64.7%
5.9%
0.0% 0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: China-5.22 US-5.24 Other-5.05
Std.D: China-0.74 US-0.55 Other-0.89
53.6%
29.5%
16.1%
0.9%
0.0% 0.0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 5.36
Std.D: 0.78
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 81

Figure 4. It is important to know about the cultural backgrounds of my classmates (by nationality
group).

Finding 2: Students Acknowledged That Cultural Distance Exists Between Chinese Students
and International Students
Interview data found that, while students recognized there are cultural differences among
international students from different countries, and among Chinese students from different parts
of China, the most significant cultural differences exist between Chinese students and
international students. DC-F-1 stated that she had experienced many different cultures in
different places, but the Chinese culture is quite unique in her eyes. Three interview participants
(including Chinese and international) noted that, in general, Chinese students are quieter in
classes, and international students are more verbal in expressing their opinions. In addition, some
other differences that influence the interactions of Chinese and international students were also
discussed by interview participants. For example, Chinese students and international students
had different definitions of what it meant to have “fun” in their spare time, jokes that included a
cultural component were hard to understand, and there were different living habits in the student
dorms. This is in line with the findings from previous research conducted by J. H. Yang (2009),
47.4%
34.2%
18.4%
0.0% 0%
63.2%
21.1%
10.5%
5.3%
0%
70.6%
17.6%
11.8%
0.0% 0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: China-5.29 US-5.59 Other-5.42
Std.D: China-0.76 US-0.69 Other-0.88
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 82

that difference in cultural values and social styles is a key barrier for integration. However, when
they talked about these differences, the interview participants did not demonstrate a strong
negative feeling, even though the differences did cause some embarrassing or uncomfortable
situations. For example, US-M-1 stated,
I guess one of the big ones for someone coming from the States is that we are used to
using washing machines and dryers, while here people tend to leave their clothes out to
dry, which is not a bad thing, but people are just used to that here because driers are not
as common in China.
Interview data found that students at LUC developed a good working knowledge of the cultural
differences between Chinese and international students, and displayed an attitude of tolerance of
these differences.
According to Hendrickson et al. (2011), most students prefer to develop friendships with
students from similar cultural backgrounds. It turns out to be true for LUC as well. It was found
during interviews that Chinese students were used to speaking to each other in Mandarin outside
of classrooms even when international students were present, which caused discomfort for
international students and made them feel excluded. Almost all of the interview participants
noted the separation of Chinese and international student groups when they were not in classes.
A survey participant identified as a female Chinese student commented, “I don’t know how, but
the truth is international students are usually close with international students while Chinese
students hang out with Chinese. I think language is the main boundary for international and
Chinese students.”
Survey results also show that Chinese students’ friendship circle is relatively more reliant
on cultural similarity. Thirty-three percent of all survey participants said that their friends at
LUC were mainly from cultural backgrounds similar to their own (Figure 5). What is notable is
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 83

that 44.7% of Chinese participants acknowledged that most of their friends were from similar
cultural backgrounds (Figure 6); for US students, the percentage was 17.6%. Interestingly, none
of the international participants who are from countries other than the United States chose the
statement “most of all my friends at LUC are from the same or similar cultural backgrounds as
me.” It could be partially attributed to the fact that most non-US international students in the
sophomore class were the single representatives of their own countries.

Figure 5. Which of the following statements is the most accurate for you?

Figure 6. Which of the following statements is the most accurate for you (by nationality group)?

33.0%
42.0%
25.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Most or all of my friends at LUC are
from the same or similar cultural
backgrounds as me.
My friends are a blend of those with
the same and different cultural
backgrounds.
Most or all of my friends at LUC are
from a different cultural backgrounds
than me.
44.7%
13.2%
42.1%
0.0%
68.4%
31.6%
17.6%
29.4%
52.9%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Most or all of my friends at LUC are
from the same or similar cultural
backgrounds as me.
Most or all of my friends at LUC are
from a different cultural backgrounds
than me.
My friends are a blend of those with
the same and different cultural
backgrounds.
China Other International United States
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 84

Finding 3: Participants Had a Good Understanding of What is Needed for Better Intercultural
Integration.
According to Lambert (1994), the five key components of intercultural competence
include (as cited in Deardorff, 2006): “world knowledge, foreign language proficiency, cultural
empathy, approval of foreign people and cultures, ability to practice one’s profession in an
international setting” (p. 247). Survey participants were asked to choose the three most important
skills to work with people from different cultures successfully. For all survey participants, the
top three choices were open-mindedness (selected by 71.4% of all participants), language
proficiency (47.3%) and knowledge of cultural differences (45.5%), as shown in Figure 7.
Empathy ranked number four (29.5%). Open-mindedness was the unanimous first choice by all
of the three participant groups by nationality (Table 10). Both the United States and Other
International participants chose empathy as the second most important factor, while Chinese
participants chose language proficiency. The combined third choice for the United States and
Other International participants is knowledge of cultural differences, which is also the third
choice by Chinese participants. The Chinese participants reported that language proficiency was
essential for intercultural interactions, while empathy was more highly regarded by international
students. The top four factors picked by survey participants aligned with Lambert’s definition,
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 85

meaning that students at LUC value many of the attitudes and behaviors that are important to
building intercultural competence.

Figure 7. What do you think are the three most important factors in successfully working with
people from different cultures?

Table 10

What do you think are the three most important factors in successfully working with people from
different cultures?

Factors
China United States Other
% Rank % Rank % Rank
Open-mindedness 23.2% 1 25.5% 1 24.6% 1
Language proficiency 18.9% 2 13.7% 3 5.3% 6
Knowledge of cultural differences 15.8% 3 11.8% 5 15.8% 3
Empathy 6.1% 7 15.7% 2 19.3% 2
Confidence 12.3% 4 3.9% 7 3.5% 9
Enthusiasm and motivation 9.2% 5 7.8% 6 8.8% 5
Shared interests and hobbies 4.8% 8 13.7% 4 8.8% 4
Shared values 7.0% 6 2.0% 9 5.3% 8
Perseverance 1.3% 9 3.9% 8 5.3% 7
Other 1.3% 10 2.0% 10 3.5% 10

Interview participants reported similar values in regards to important factors for working
with people from different cultures. The factors most frequently stated by interview participants
included knowledge of cultural difference, open-mindedness, respect, tolerance and empathy. As
71.4%
47.3%
45.5%
29.5%
28.6%
26.8%
20.5%
17.9%
7.1%
5.4%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Open-mindedness
Language proficiency
Knowledge of cultural differences
Empathy
Confidence
Enthusiasm and motivation
Shared interests and hobbies
Shared values
Perseverance
Other
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 86

DC-M-1 articulated cultural empathy in an impressive way, “You have to understand that the
opinions they have are formed by the cultural backgrounds, and it’s the same as my opinion and
how it’s formed by my background. And if I believe firmly that I am right, then they also feel
that way.”
In addition, awareness of one’s own culture as an important dimension of intercultural
integration (Andrade, 2006; Kim, 2001; Lin & Liu, 2019) was also discussed during the
interviews. For example, China-F-2 stated,
When you are really getting close to someone from a different cultural background,
respecting their culture is the first thing. But then the second thing is that they got to
respect my culture as well…I don’t want to study abroad, because I feel like, as a Chinese
citizen, I haven’t known much about my country. I feel that four years in college can
really shape a person’s value in a fundamental level. I feel that it’s important for me to
stay in China to shape my values, instead of study abroad at an early age.
A survey participant suggested that Student Affairs should organize more events for students to
show pride in their own cultures.
Finding 4: Participants Had Different Levels of Intercultural Knowledge or Experiences
Before LUC
Five interview participants reported that they already had a certain level of intercultural
experiences before coming to LUC, while others stated they had very little exposure to other
cultures. DC-F-1 said she used to live in a city where the population is composed of people from
all over the world, which prepared her well to interact naturally with people from different
cultural backgrounds. Before LUC, DC-M-2 was educated in an international school where he
had classmates from different countries, so it was not a challenge at all to form friendships at
LUC with students from different national and cultural backgrounds. However, for Chinese
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 87

students, prior intercultural experiences were relatively limited to travels or short-term exchange
experiences in other countries. For example, in high school, China-F-1 participated in a summer
camp in Canada, where she had roommates from five different countries. That was her only
intercultural experience before coming to LUC.
Skills to Effectively Communicate and Collaborate
The second assumed influence is that students need to have the skills required for
effective intercultural integration. As introduced in Chapter Two, Kim (1991) suggested that
intercultural communication skills include three dimensions: ability to understand and interpret
cultural differences, willingness to accommodate, and ability to utilize the skills effectively.
Ting-Toomey and Dorjee (2018) believed that adaptability and sensitivity are the core of
intercultural communication competency. Three findings related to this influence were identified
and discussed below.
Finding 1: Participants Were Confident About Their Current Ability to Navigate Intercultural
Interactions
Survey data show that 12.5% of participants were negative about their own cultural
sensitivity in intercultural communication (Figure 8).
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 88

Figure 8. When I interact with classmates who are from different cultures, I am sensitive to
subtle differences in communication and meaning during our interaction.

However, survey participants had more wide-ranging opinions about their own
intercultural communication competency based on different countries of origin (Figure 9).
Survey participants from the Unites States chose less “strongly agree” and more “strongly
disagree” than participants from elsewhere, and 47% chose “somewhat agree” (Figure 10), and
the mean was 3.71, the largest among the three groups. It could be partially explained by
concerns related to political stereotypes of China and Chinese people, as well as tensions around
political discussions in the classroom, which were discussed by interview participants (refer to
the findings discussed in motivation and organizational sections). It could also be explained by
the idea that American participants had relatively high cultural sensitivity and chose to use more
discretion in what they said. US-M-1 stated, “I still get a little bit nervous because I feel like if
I’m too assertive or something that I might offend somebody by whatever, or that I might just to
say something wrong or out of place.”
17.9%
42.0%
27.7%
8.0%
4.5%
0.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 4.61
Std.D: 1.01
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 89

Figure 9. I always know what to say when interacting with people from different cultures.

Figure 10. I always know what to say when interacting with people from different cultures (by
nationality group).

Based on the above data, it is noted that there are still gaps in student interview
participants’ current intercultural communication skills.
Finding 2: Participants Made Proactive Effort to Adapt
For the statement “I actively learn and ask questions about my classmates’ culture or
background,” 61.6% selected “agree” or “strongly agree” (Figure 11). All three participant
groups by nationality gave overwhelmingly positive responses, but Chinese participants’ mean
8.0%
14.3%
35.7%
29.5%
9.8%
2.7%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
8%
14%
36%
5%
36%
1%
11%
26% 26%
16% 16%
5%
6%
0%
47%
24%
18%
6%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Disagree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: 3.73
Std.D: 1.15
Mean: China-3.80 US-3.29 Other-3.84
Std.D: China-1.05 US-1.18 Other-1.39
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 90

was lower than those of the United States and Other International participants (Figure 12), which
indicated that Chinese participants probably were less proactive in reaching out for cultural
knowledge.

Figure 11. I actively learn and ask questions about my classmates’ culture or background.

Figure 12. I actively learn and ask questions about my classmates’ culture or background (by
nationality group).

For the statement “I did NOT invest enough effort to develop friendships with classmates
from different cultural backgrounds,” the responses were dispersedly distributed for all survey
participants (Figure 13, reverse-scored). Chinese survey participants presented the highest mean
23.2%
38.4%
25.9%
9.8%
2.7%
0.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 4.70
Std.D: 1.02
21.1%
34.2%
31.6%
11.8%
1.3%
0.0%
26.3%
57.9%
10.5%
0.0%
5.3%
0.0%
29.4%
35.3%
17.6%
11.8%
5.9%
0.0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: China-4.62 US-4.71 Other-5.00
Std.D: China-0.99 US-1.18 Other-0.92
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 91

(Figure 14, reverse-scored). This result is in line with that of the prior statement. Chinese
participants were positive about their proactivity and effort trying to learn about different
cultures and making friends from different cultural backgrounds, but the degree was relatively
lower than those of international students.

Figure 13. I did NOT invest enough effort to develop friendships with classmates from different
cultural backgrounds.

Figure 14. I did NOT invest enough effort to develop friendships with classmates from different
cultural backgrounds (by nationality group).

5.4%
17.9%
23.2%
25.0%
19.6%
8.9%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 3.62
Std.D: 1.36
7.9%
21.1%
27.6%
21.1%
15.8%
6.6%
0.0%
10.5%
0.0%
31.6%
36.8%
21.1%
0.0%
11.8%
29.4%
35.3%
17.6%
5.9%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: China-3.36 US-3.76 Other-4.58
Std.D: China-1.35 US-1.06 Other-1.14
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 92

US-M-1 stated in the interview, “I think I’ve really tried to just become friends with
people who aren’t from the US or at least the same part of the US as me, because I think it is the
most important way to learn about people of different backgrounds.” China-M-2 described how
he proactively approached an African student after class to learn more details about prison in
Africa because he did not fully capture the African student’s comments in class but was very
interested. China-F-1 invited two international students to come to her home to spend the
Chinese New Year holiday. She said,
They have no place to go. They cannot go back home, so I think it is kind of my
responsibility to invite them to my home [for the holiday], so I just did that. I invited two,
and I think that is an important effort for me to make. Because of that experience we are
now very good friends.
OECD-M-1 believed that most students were able to adapt to the multicultural environment at
LUC, “It’s a lot of range to it, but overall I’d say that most people have made the full adaptation
within the year.”
Finding 3: Students Are Able to Tolerate Cultural Differences and Find Common Ground
Four interview participants discussed the importance of “common ground.” For example,
US-M-1 stated, “I really enjoyed it. I think everybody is very open to the idea of working with
different cultures and working together and the idea that we can all find some common ground
on something.” Interview participant DC-F-1 talked about the mutual adaptation efforts made by
herself and her Chinese roommate, which enabled them to become best friends. Sixty-three
percent of the survey participants agreed or strongly agreed that they could often notice
similarities in personality between people who belong to entirely different cultures (Figure 15).
The United States participants presented the highest mean and lowest standard deviation
compared to Chinese and other international participants, which indicated a higher level of
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 93

confidence in this regard (Figure 16). The data show that participants believe they are able to
find commonality as people despite the distraction of cultural stereotypes.

Figure 15. I often notice similarities in personality between people who belong to completely
different cultures.

Figure 16. I often notice similarities in personality between people who belong to completely
different cultures (by nationality group).

DC-M-3 stated,
I think that serves the purpose of informing students about the differences and trying to
make it more noticeable that we have a lot of things in common. Maybe at least, it’s
25.0%
38.4%
25.9%
7.1%
1.8% 1.8%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 4.72
Std.D: 1.08
22%
39%
26%
9%
1% 1%
32%
16%
42%
5%
0%
5%
29%
59%
6%
0%
6%
0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: China-4.68 US-5.06 Other-4.58
Std.D: China-1.04 US-0.94 Other-1.27
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 94

similar here, but in my country, I don’t know. …With all of this diversity, we’re
different, but we’re similar in a way. I think it should always go back to, oh, we’re
similar in this, and we’re similar in that.
DC-M-2 stated, “if you reduce [all different cultures] to the simplest forms, we all have the same
thing.” Interview data also indicated that participants have the skill of seeking commonality
among peers from different cultural backgrounds as an effective way of improving intercultural
interactions.
Based on the above analysis, the -based skills to effectively communicate and collaborate
cross-culturally was partially validated because there are still gaps in terms of participants’ skills
of intercultural communication and evidence of additional effort may be needed intercultural
integration, particularly among the Chinese student participants.
Self-Reflecting and Evaluating Skills for Improvement
The third influence in the knowledge domain is that students need to have the ability to
reflect on their experiences and efforts and evaluate how well their approaches or actions are
working towards the goal of developing intercultural competence. They need to learn from their
observations of others’ successes or mistakes and internalize these observations into their own
knowledge and skills. Two findings related to this influence were found in the data and discussed
below.
Finding 1: Participants Were Able to Reflect on Their Intercultural Experiences for
Improvement
Survey data show that 71.4% of survey participants agreed or strongly agreed that they
reflected on their cultural experiences with classmates and tried to improve (Figure 17). Chinese
participants posted the highest mean (Figure 18) with the most “strongly agree.” The result
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 95

shows that most participants, especially Chinese participants, believed they paid attention to their
intercultural experiences and tried to reflect on them for improvement.

Figure 17. I sometimes think about how I interact with classmates who are from different
cultures and try to take actions to improve.

Figure 18. I sometimes think about how I interact with classmates who are from different
cultures and try to take actions to improve (by nationality group).

Interview participants also talked about how they reflected on their intercultural activities
and tried to improve in different ways. For example, five participants discussed their “comfort
zone” and how they made an effort, enough or not, to step out of it. DC-M-1 stated,
20.5%
50.9%
22.3%
4.5%
1.8%
0.0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 4.84
Std.D: 0.86
25.0%
47.4%
21.1%
6.6%
0.0% 0.0%
5.3%
57.9%
31.6%
0.0%
5.3%
0.0%
17.6%
58.8%
17.6%
0.0%
5.9%
0.0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: China-4.91 US-4.82 Other-4.58
Std.D: China-0.85 US-0.92 Other-0.82
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 96

I don’t like to be in my comfort zone in academics, but maybe because it’s so much
pressure from different aspects in my life that friendship is something that I like to have a
comfort zone. And of course, I would love to break it. I would love to... So, one of my
goals now is to actually just visit a Chinese friend in their house. That they show me their
childhood memories and how they spent their childhood. I would really enjoy that.
China-F-1 stated, “I think I’m trying to get out of my comfort zone but not very successful yet.
I’m still not fully out of my own comfort zone.” Others reflected on their own personality. For
example, China-M-1 stated,
Being introverted doesn’t mean it’s a bad thing, but it really just sometimes hinders
interpersonal communication. Especially, I mean at LUC, it is a really active
multicultural communicating environment. So I think I need to better utilize the
environment that LUC provides us.
Five participants said that they had been focusing too much on coursework and felt they should
allocate more time and energy for mixing with classmates. This is in line with the findings from
previous research that academic pressure is also an inhibitor of intercultural interactions
(Harrison & Peacock, 2009; Volet & Ang, 2012).
Finding 2: Participants Recognized the Importance of Personal Effort and Preference
OECD-F-1 believed that intercultural integration depended on personal preference, and
there was only so much that the university could do. DC-M-1, DC-M-2 and China-F-4 echoed
this opinion and suggested that both the university and the students needed to make an effort. A
survey participant identified as a female non-US international student commented at the end of
the survey, “I think the school itself is doing what they can to promote intercultural integration,
but I think if the change does not start on an individual level, the integration will not improve.”
Summary of Knowledge Findings
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 97

Data show that participants had a good grasp on the knowledge of the cultural differences
existing on the campus and demonstrated awareness of these differences in communications and
interactions with classmates from different cultural backgrounds. They were also confident in
their ability and skills of intercultural mixing, but the confidence levels varied among
individuals. It was a common observation that two significantly separated social circles had been
formed by Chinese students and international students due to language and cultural barriers. All
cultural groups had been making an effort to learn about other cultures and integrate better, but it
seems that Chinese participants were less proactive than international participants. Participants
were not yet fully confident in their intercultural communications. Participants have
demonstrated their deliberate reflection on their intercultural experiences with classmates and
their intention to identify areas for improvement. Language barriers, cultural comfort zone and
too much focus on coursework were considered negative factors for better intercultural
integration. Meanwhile, participants believed that personal effort and preference for cultural
engagement were very important for successful intercultural integration.
According to the findings identified from survey and interview results, two of the three
assumed knowledge influences were validated, and one was partially validated.
Motivation Findings
As introduced in Chapter Two, there are three main indices of motivated behavior: active
choice, persistence, and mental effort (Rueda, 2011). Three critical motivational factors related
to students’ capacity to building intercultural competence were examined: self-efficacy, utility
value and intrinsic value. Three motivation influences are examined through analysis of data
from the survey and interviews.
The following criteria were utilized to examine whether students at LUC were
sufficiently motivated to engage in intercultural integration. For a survey item related to specific
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 98

motivation influences to be validated, the mean scores (where applicable) were no less than 4.0
for all participants and no less than 3.5 for each of the three respective nationality groups. For an
influence to be validated in the interview data, participant responses must have been clearly
affirmative. When both of the criteria are fulfilled, the influence was considered validated.
Table 11 shows the findings generated from the research for each assumed motivation
influences and their validation result.
Table 11
Assumed Motivation Influences, Findings and Validation
Assumed Influences Findings Validated
Not
Validated
Students need to believe they
are able to develop
intercultural competence
through interactions and
collaborations with classmates
(self-efficacy)
1. Participants are confident about their
cultural adaptability with a noted
difference between Chinese and
international participants
2. Participants have improved their
intercultural skills at LUC
√
Students need to see the value
of intercultural competence in
increasing their academic
performance and
employability (utility value)
1. Participants recognize the importance of
intercultural competence for a
successful life
2. The diversity environment at LUC is
considered a simulation of the
globalized world
√
Students need to have an
inherent interest in and
enjoyment of learning and
experiencing different cultures
through intercultural
interactions with classmates
(intrinsic value)
1. Cultural diversity is a key reason for
participants to choose LUC for college
education
2. Participants are interested in cultural
exchange
3. Perceived prejudice and bigotry
compromise the interests in intercultural
exchange.
√

Self-Efficacy in Developing Intercultural Competence
As discussed in Chapter Two, students at LUC need to believe that effective intercultural
integration could be a difficult and even painful process, but it is a realistic and achievable goal.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 99

The following findings related to self-efficacy were identified. Two findings related to this
influence have been identified and will be discussed below.
Finding 1: Participants Were Confident About Their Cultural Adaptability With Noted
Difference Between Chinese and International Students
Survey data show that 67.9% of survey participants agreed or strongly agreed that they
were able to adapt to other cultures while maintaining their own culture, which shows that
participants had a satisfactory level of confidence in their own cultural adaptability (Figure 19).
The percentages for Chinese, Unites States and Other International participants were 63.1%,
82.4%, and 73.7%, respectively (Figure 20). However, based on means and standard deviations,
it seems that all three participant groups had a similar confidence level.

Figure 19. I believe it is possible for me to effectively adapt to other cultures while maintaining
my own culture.

18.8%
49.1%
23.2%
5.4%
3.6%
0.0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 4.74
Std.D: 0.94
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 100

Figure 20. I believe it is possible for me to effectively adapt to other cultures while maintaining
my own culture (by nationality group).

In addition, 81.3% of survey participants (Figure 21) agreed or strongly agreed to the
statement “I am confident that after graduating, I will be able to work well with people from
different countries and backgrounds in a globalized society,” which shows that participants had a
high level of self-confidence in achieving intercultural competency at LUC.

Figure 21. I am confident that after graduating, I will be able to work well with people from
different countries and backgrounds in a globalized society.

18.4%
44.7%
28.9%
5.3%
2.6%
0.0%
21.1%
52.6%
10.5% 10.5%
5.3%
0.0%
17.6%
64.7%
11.8%
0.0%
5.9%
0.0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: China-4.71 US-4.88 Other-4.74
Std.D: China-0.92 US-0.90 Other-1.07
41.1%
40.2%
13.4%
2.7%
1.8%
0.9%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 5.13
Std.D: 0.97
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 101

Three survey items were designed to test students’ confidence levels in cultural
adaptability from a negative perspective. There were 51.8% of survey participants who agreed or
strongly agreed that they felt more comfortable with people from their own culture (Figure 22,
reverse-scored). The percentages for Chinese, United States and Other International participants
were 63.2%, 29.4% and 26.3%, respectively (Figure 23, reverse-scored). The mean for Chinese
participants was 2.36, significantly lower than those of the United States and Other International
participants. This result is in line with the observations from multiple interview participants that
Chinese students spend more social time with fellow Chinese classmates. The mean for Chinese
participants (2.36) was well below the 3.5 threshold (the first criterion of validation). However,
this finding reflects what was published by other scholars that Chinese students tend to form
their own social circle when there are enough Chinese peers (Razek & Brown, 2015), as well as
the fact that Chinese participants were aware of this issue and responded to the survey honestly.
Taking into consideration the results of other relevant survey items and interview findings, the
data do not support the conclusion that the Chinese student participants were not motivated to
engage in intercultural integration. This does raise the question of whether the percentage of
Chinese students in the class is too high and whether the presence of more international students
would help Chinese students step out of their cultural comfort zone.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 102

Figure 22. I feel more comfortable with people from my own culture than with people from
other cultures.

Figure 23. I feel more comfortable with people from my own culture than with people from
other cultures (by nationality group).

For the statement “I avoid situations where I have to deal with classmates from other
cultural backgrounds,” 56.3% chose “disagree” or “strongly disagree” (Figure 24, reverse-
scored). The percentages for Chinese, United States and Other International participants were
48.7%, 70.6% and 73.7%, respectively (Figure 25, reverse-scored). The mean for Chinese
participants was 4.18, much lower than those of international participants. This result supports
14.3%
37.5%
20.5%
11.6%
13.4%
2.7%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
18.4%
44.7%
25.0%
7.9%
2.6%
1.3%
0.0%
26.3%
5.3%
31.6% 31.6%
5.3%
11.8%
17.6% 17.6%
5.9%
41.2%
5.9%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: China-2.36 US-3.65 Other-3.84
Std.D: China-1.03 US-1.57 Other-1.27
Mean: 2.80
Std.D: 1.34
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 103

the finding that Chinese participants had a relatively lower confidence level in terms of
intercultural activities compared with international students. Still, more Chinese participants
were willing to step out of their cultural comfort zone when needed.

Figure 24. I avoid situations where I have to deal with classmates from other cultural
backgrounds.

Figure 25. I avoid situations where I have to deal with classmates from other cultural
backgrounds (by nationality group).

Survey data show that participants had more wide-ranging opinions on close friendship
across cultures (Figure 26, reverse-scored). It is almost an even split between the positive and
2.7%
7.1%
16.1%
17.9%
30.4%
25.9%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
3.9%
7.9%
17.1%
22.4%
34.2%
14.5%
0.0%
10.5% 10.5%
5.3%
21.1%
52.6%
0.0% 0.0%
17.6%
11.8%
23.5%
47.1%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: China-4.18 US-5.00 Other-4.95
Std.D: China-1.31 US-1.14 Other-1.39
Mean: 4.44
Std.D: 1.35
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 104

negative responses. Again, the patterns for Chinese and international participants were
significantly different (Figure 27, reverse-scored). The result shows that when it comes to close
intercultural friendship, international participants were more optimistic, while Chinese
participants had a relatively lower level of confidence. The overall mean (3.85) was lower than
4.0 (the first validation criterion), but only slightly. The means for the three nationality groups
were all higher than 3.5.

Figure 26. It is difficult to become close friends with classmates from other cultural
backgrounds.

4.5%
13.4%
27.7%
17.9%
20.5%
16.1%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 3.85
Std.D: 1.43
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 105

Figure 27. It is difficult to become close friends with classmates from other cultural backgrounds
(by nationality group).

Finding 2: Participants Improved Their Intercultural Skills at LUC
When asked the statement, “My ability to interact with classmates from other cultural
backgrounds has improved since I came to LUC,” 84.8% of survey participants chose “agree” or
“strongly disagree” (Figure 28). The percentages for Chinese, United States and Other
International participants were 89.5%, 76.5%, 73.7%, respectively. This is in line with the
findings from interviews. Almost all interview participants acknowledged their improvement in
intercultural ability after joining LUC. For example, China-M-1 stated:
I would say much improved, I think. To interact with international students was a bit
challenging for me, but thankfully I have an international roommate, and he encouraged
me to step out of my comfort zone. That’s what LUC has always been telling us. I think,
yeah, and compared to my prior experience, and I think I can interact with international
students with almost no barriers now.
6.6%
15.8%
30.3%
18.4%
22.4%
6.6%
0.0%
5.3%
21.1%
15.8%
21.1%
36.8%
0.0%
11.8%
23.5%
17.6%
11.8%
35.3%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: China-3.54 US-4.35 Other-4.63
Std.D: China-1.34 US-1.45 Other-1.31
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 106

Figure 28. My ability to interact with classmates from other cultural backgrounds has improved
since I came to LUC.

The Utility Value of Intercultural Competence
For students, to make an effort to overcome cultural barriers and interact and integrate
with classmates requires understanding the benefits of doing it. It is important to explore whether
students at LUC are aware of these benefits and the degree to which they value them. Two
findings related to this influence were identified and discussed below.
Finding 1: Participants Recognized the Importance of Intercultural Competence for a
Successful Life
Survey data show that 83.1% of survey participants agreed or strongly agreed that
effective intercultural ability would make them more successful as a student (Figure 29). Even
more participants believed that intercultural competency is vital for their future career
development, with 91.9% chose “agree” or “strongly agree” (Figure 30). OECD-M-1 stated,
“You have to diversify in some way or another in order to get to the best outcome for anything,
whether it’s personally, or business, social life, you name it.” US-M-1 stated,
39.3%
45.5%
10.7%
0.9%
1.8% 1.8%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 5.14
Std.D: 0.98
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 107

And then from when we graduate, the idea that if we don’t learn to embrace other
cultures now, we will never be successful in going out and being real people in the world,
doing business, working in government, working in education, whatever we do. Then
there’s no way to be successful unless you have an idea of what other cultures are like or
working with other cultures.

Figure 29. I feel more successful as a student when I can have effective intercultural interactions
at schools.

Figure 30. Understanding how to work or interact with people from other cultures is important
for my future employability.

42.9%
40.2%
11.6%
3.6%
1.8%
0.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
46.4%
45.5%
4.5%
1.8% 1.8%
0.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 5.19
Std.D: 0.90
Mean: 5.33
Std.D: 0.79
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 108

For the statement “I feel that people from other cultures have many valuable insights that
I can learn from in my classes,” 81.2% of survey participants chose “agree” or “strongly agree,”
which shows that participants also considered intercultural interaction academically beneficial
(Figure 31).

Figure 31. I feel that people from other cultures have many valuable insights that I can learn
from in my classes.

Finding 2: The Diversity Environment at LUC Was Considered a Simulation of the Globalized
World
Survey data indicate that most survey participants (85.8%) agreed or strongly agreed that
interactions with their classmates at LUC would help them develop intercultural competency that
is needed in the real world (Figure 32).
48.2%
33.0%
16.1%
0.9%
1.8%
0.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 5.25
Std.D: 0.88
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 109

Figure 32. Interacting with classmates from different cultural backgrounds helps me develop
cross-cultural capabilities.

Three interview participants said that they believed this world is more interconnected
than ever, and globalization is an inevitable trend. The diverse cultural environment at LUC
provided them the opportunities to hone their intercultural skills that are required in the real
world. US-M-1 stated,
And so just the idea that being educated in a cross-cultural environment, to consider that,
if, for example, I might be doing business between the US and China and having that
understanding, is helpful not only in avoiding cultural whoopsie-daisies when I try to
make a deal with somebody, but also in understanding, for example, if it were in today’s
world why the trade war would be happening and what can we do to stop it.
DC-M-3 expressed a similar point of view:
That’s kind of what I wanted to get out of this experience, like a small globe here at LUC
which I can get to know people from different backgrounds, in this case regarding
culture, since I really believe that the world is coming closer, in a way, and you need
cooperation to solve issues.
51.8%
33.9%
10.7%
2.7%
0.9%
0.0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 5.33
Std.D: 0.84
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 110

The Intrinsic Value of Experiencing Different Cultures
In Chapter Two, a hypothesis was made that the students who chose to have their college
education at LUC had a relatively keen interest in learning and experiencing different cultures. It
is important to find out how much this interest is working as a motivational factor for students at
LUC to engage in intercultural integration. Three findings related to this influence were
identified and discussed below.
Finding 1: Cultural Diversity Was a Key Reason for Participants to Choose LUC for College
Education
As survey data show, 68.8% of all survey participants agreed or strongly agreed that the
opportunity to develop intercultural competency was a key reason for them to choose LUC for
their college education (Figure 33). Chinese participants presented a higher mean than
international participants (Figure 34), which indicates that cultural diversity is a clear
differentiator for LUC compared to other Chinese universities. There were 63.9% of
international participants (note that only those who identified themselves as international
students were presented with this statement in the survey) agreed or strongly agreed that learning
about China was also a key attraction for them (Figure 35). This finding is in line with what was
learned from the interviews. Almost all interview participants talked about similar ideas. DC-F-1
stated, “I feel that people that came here to this university were students mostly are interested in
learning about other cultures.” DC-M-1 said, “I applied to a lot of places, and LUC was the most
interesting choice because it’s an American university, but it’s in an international place like
China, and then China itself brings like an entirely different set of rules. So I was interested to
see how that would play out.” US-F-2 stated, “I just enjoyed going in and having discussions and
looking at things from different perspectives.” US-F-1 stated,
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 111

In middle school, I started taking Chinese classes and from there, I think my love for the
language as well as the culture grew. I actually specifically chose my high school because
it was one of the only ones that were near me that taught Chinese…Actually, I think I
chose LUC because, I mean, what better place to study Chinese and Chinese culture than
in China itself?”
China-M-2 said, “There are many reasons that I chose LUC, but the main reason is that I can
have the opportunity to meet students and faculty from all over the world.” US-M-1 stated, “We
all have something that unites us, and that’s our desire to be here.”

Figure 33. Developing the ability of effective cross-cultural communication and collaboration is
one of the most important reasons that I chose LUC for my college education.

28.6%
40.2%
21.4%
4.5% 4.5%
0.9%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 4.81
Std.D: 1.09
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 112

Figure 34. Developing the ability of effective cross-cultural communication and collaboration is
one of the most important reasons that I chose LUC for my college education (by nationality
group).

Figure 35. Learning about China is an important goal of my education at LUC.

Finding 2: Participants Were Interested in Cultural Exchange
Survey data show that 84% of survey participants agreed or strongly agreed that
intercultural interaction is an interesting experience. This indicates that participants had a
consistent and high level of interest in intercultural experiences, which is in line with the above
31.6%
39.5%
23.7%
3.9%
1.3%
0.0%
21.1%
52.6%
10.5%
5.3%
10.5%
0.0%
23.5%
29.4%
23.5%
5.9%
11.8%
5.9%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: China-4.96 US-4.29 Other-4.68
Std.D: China-0.91 US-0.49 Other-1.17
33.3%
30.6%
22.2%
8.3%
5.6%
0.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 4.78
Std.D: 1.16
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 113

finding that choosing LUC was largely based on the students’ interests in cultural diversity and
intercultural interactions.

Figure 36. I find interacting with classmates from different cultural backgrounds to be an
interesting experience.

However, it is somewhat different when it comes to actions. There were only 51.7% of
survey participants who agreed or strongly agreed that they had been proactively seeking
intercultural experiences. The percentage with “agree/strongly agree” responses for Chinese
participants was only 43.4%, compared to 70.6% for United States participants and 68.4% for
Other International participants (Figure 38). Data show that Chinese participants were more
passive in terms of seeking intercultural interactions with classmates. This is also in line with the
finding from interviews. Three Chinese interview participants thought they did not invest enough
time or energy in mixing with international students due to too much focus on coursework or less
confidence.
43.8%
40.2%
8.9%
4.5%
2.7%
0.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 5.18
Std.D: 0.96
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 114

Figure 37. I usually look for opportunities to interact with people from other cultures.

Figure 38. I usually look for opportunities to interact with people from other cultures (by
nationality group).

For the survey statement, “My classmates are interested in learning about my culture,”
which is to understand how students perceive other students’ interest levels in different cultures,
49.1% of survey participants agreed or strongly agreed, and 32.1% chose “somewhat agree”
(Figure 39). Though the distribution of responses was relatively dispersed, only 18.7% of
participants responded negatively. Data show that Chinese and Other International participants
felt their classmates had a high level of interest in their own cultures (Figure 40). However, only
19.6%
32.1%
28.6%
15.2%
3.6%
0.9%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
17.1%
26.3%
34.2%
18.4%
2.6%
1.3%
21.1%
47.4%
21.1%
5.3% 5.3%
0.0%
29.4%
41.2%
11.8% 11.8%
5.9%
0.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: China-4.33 US-4.76 Other-4.74
Std.D: China-1.12 US-1.16 Other-1.02
Mean: 4.46
Std.D: 1.13
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 115

29.4% of Unites States participants agreed or strongly agreed that their culture interested
classmates from other countries. In addition, as high as 23.5% of United States participants chose
“disagree or strongly disagree.” This finding is not so surprising because the above analysis has
demonstrated that Chinese participants were not as proactive as United States participants in
seeking intercultural experiences, which might partially contribute to the perception by some
United States participants that other classmates are not interested. However, Other International
participants still posted a much higher percentage of “agree/strongly agree” (47.4%) though
lower than that of Chinese students. This could be explained in a way that American culture is
both influential and well-accepted in other countries, including China, therefore the level of
interest or curiosity in American culture presented by Chinese and other international students
might not be very high though this hypothesis was not tested in this research.
Interest in cultural experience was also supported by findings from interviews. US-F-1
said, “The more cultural interaction, the better. I love to learn about Japanese culture. I think
that’s really cool.” DC-F-1 stated, “I think the thing that interested me the most was getting
emerged into the Chinese culture and also exploring this with a lot of other multicultural ideas.”
China-M-1 stated, “I enjoy living with international friends and learn from them, especially
about their values which are very meaningful and interesting.”
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 116

Figure 39. My classmates are interested in learning about my culture.

Figure 40. My classmates are interested in learning about my culture (by nationality group).
Finding 3: Perceived Prejudice and Bigotry Compromise the Interests in Intercultural
Exchange
According to Hail (2015), Chinese students studying abroad reported their discontent
about host country students’ misinformed, prejudiced and offensive views of China. Similar
findings were noticed in this study as well. During the research, both Chinese and international
participants demonstrated a good level of interest, open-mindedness and tolerance regarding
14.3%
34.8%
32.1%
10.7%
8.0%
0.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
15.8%
38.2%
28.9%
13.2%
3.9%
0.0%
21.1%
26.3%
42.1%
0.0%
10.5%
0.0% 0.0%
29.4%
35.3%
11.8%
23.5%
0.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: China-4.49 US-3.71 Other-4.47
Std.D: China-1.03 US-1.13 Other-1.14
Mean: 4.37
Std.D: 1.10
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 117

cultural differences. However, it was noticed that particular perceived prejudice and bias, such as
political stereotypes, was a significant obstacle for intercultural integration. China-F-4 talked
about her frustrations of failing to convince international students to change their opinions on
politics in China and thought they were not really open-minded enough: “…like Chinese people
know nothing about China,” she stated. China-F-3 also expressed similar feelings:
Some international students had some wrong assumptions about Chinese politics. It’s a
very complicated issue, but they kind of assumed that we are living in the fire all the
time, and we’re always being watched by the big brother…And that just makes us feel
very uncomfortable. It makes us feel that we are stupid, we don’t know what our
governments are doing, but while in fact there really are disparity from both sides. And
the right thing to do is to really reserve some space and talk about it rather than just
assume that whatever you know is right.
DC-M-1 stated, “I get the feeling that international students interact more comfortably with each
other than with the Chinese students. And I think that is because of their difference in opinion on
government policies and all of that.” He also confessed that a difference in a political topic that
he felt strongly about would prevent them from forming close friendships.
In addition to the tension over China politics, other political issues existing in Asian
countries, such as those between Japan and Korea, Chinese Malaysians and native Malayans,
were bothering some international students as well. From a different perspective, a survey
participant identified as a female student from the United States complained about some Chinese
students’ prejudice on a specific religion. Moreover, two international interview participants
shared their experiences of racism among students on campus. Although both events were not
severe in nature and their typicality was not clear, it seems that with a highly diverse student
body, the LUC campus is not racism-free.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 118

Summary of Motivation Findings
Almost all interview participants agreed that the cultural diversity at LUC as a joint-
venture university made a difference in their decision to choose LUC for a college education.
International participants were very interested in learning and experiencing Chinese and other
cultures at LUC. Chinese participants considered it a significant differentiator that made LUC
stand out among other options in China. Participants recognized the importance of intercultural
competency to have a successful life in the globalized world. They believed the experience at
LUC would prepare them for the real world. In general, participants were confident about their
cultural adaptability, but Chinese participants were relatively less confident and less proactive
even though they had more substantial interests and motivation. Overall, participants had been
enjoying intercultural exchanges and felt their improvement in their own abilities. However,
different opinions on politics and religions caused conflicts and misunderstandings among
students, particularly between Chinese students and international students. As a result, the
perceived prejudice and bigotry contributed to the separation and demotivated students to
achieve close intercultural friendship.
According to the findings, all of the three assumed motivation influences are considered
validated.
Organization Findings
As introduced in Chapter Two, it is crucial to understand how LUC’s cultural model and
cultural settings from the perspective of both the organizational culture and the more visible
aspects of the organization have influenced the students’ intercultural integration. Three assumed
organization influences were identified. The following criteria are utilized to evaluate whether
LUC has established an environment that effectively facilitates students’ intercultural
integration. For a survey item related to specific organization influences to be validated, the
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 119

mean scores (where applicable) were no less than 4.0 for all participants and no less than 3.5 for
each of the three respective nationality groups. For an influence to be validated in the interview
data, participant responses must have been clearly affirmative. When both of the criteria are
fulfilled, the influence was considered validated.
Table 12 shows the findings generated from the research for each assumed knowledge
influence and their validation result.
Table 12
Assumed Organizational Influences, Findings and Validation
Assumed Influences Findings Validated
Not
Validated
The school needs to cultivate
a culture of embracing
cultural diversity and
encouraging intercultural
integration
1. LUC has established a campus culture of
embracing cultural diversity
2. The small but diverse community
supports intercultural integration
3. Categorization by Chinese and
international perceived negative for
integration
4. A higher percentage of international
students is preferred
√
The school needs to establish
a classroom climate that
encourages and facilitates
students’ intercultural
integration
1. The curriculum effectively supports
intercultural communication
2. Professors and the pedagogy facilitate in-
class intercultural interactions
3. Political topics are the major challenge
for in-class discussion
4. Differences exist in academic strength
and preference of Chinese and
international students
√
The school needs to provide
students with effective
extracurricular programs and
activities promoting
intercultural integration
among students
1. Participants are satisfied with Student
Affairs’ effort in promoting intercultural
integration
2. Student-run clubs are effective in helping
students’ intercultural collaboration
3. Academic pressure is holding back
participants from more participation in
extracurricular activities
√

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 120

An Institutional Culture Encouraging Intercultural Integration
It is essential to understand from the students’ perspective whether there is a supportive
and encouraging culture at LUC and to what degree this culture has positively impacted their
motivations for intercultural integration. Four findings related to this influence were identified
and discussed below.
Finding 1: LUC Has Established a Campus Culture Embracing Cultural Diversity
Survey data show that 76.8% of all survey participants agreed or strongly agreed that
cultural diversity is a defining feature of LUC (Figure 41). This supports the previous finding
that intercultural experience is a major reason for participants to choose LUC for a college
education. Besides, 90.2% agreed or strongly agreed that they felt encouraged to have
intercultural interactions (Figure 42). China-M-1 stated, “The school encourages us to talk about
cultural differences, and that really motivated me to talk about cultural differences and learn
about other cultures.”

Figure 41. Cultural diversity is one of the defining features of LUC.

41.1%
35.7%
17.0%
3.6%
1.8%
0.9%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 5.08
Std.D: 1.01
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 121

Figure 42. At LUC, I am encouraged to interact with classmates from different cultures.

There were 63.4% of survey participants agreed or strongly agreed that LUC was able to
cultivate a campus culture supporting cultural diversity (Figure 43). Seventeen percent of
participants who had negative opinions are mainly international participants (Figure 44). The
percentages for the United States and Other International participants were 35.2% and 31.6%,
respectively (Figure 44). Regarding participants’ satisfaction level with their intercultural
experiences at LUC, 51.8% agreed or strongly agreed that their expectations had been exceeded,
and only 18.8% responded negatively (Figure 45). The data indicate that Chinese participants
reported the highest satisfaction level (Figure 46), with only 16% responding negatively,
followed by Unites States participants (24%) and Other International participants (27%).
43.8%
46.4%
6.3%
1.8% 1.8%
0.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 5.29
Std.D: 0.81
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 122

Figure 43. LUC has established a campus culture that embraces cultural diversity.

Figure 44. LUC has established a campus culture that embraces cultural diversity (by nationality
group).

25.9%
37.5%
19.6%
11.6%
2.7% 2.7%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
31.6%
40.8%
18.4%
9.2%
0.0% 0.0%
5.3%
21.1%
42.1%
15.8%
5.3%
10.5%
23.5%
41.2%
0.0%
17.6%
11.8%
5.9%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: China-4.95 US-4.29 Other-3.74
Std.D: China-0.93 US-1.56 Other-1.29
Mean: 4.64
Std.D: 1.21
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 123

Figure 45. My intercultural experiences at LUC exceeded my expectations.

Figure 46. My intercultural experiences at LUC exceeded my expectations (by nationality
group).

More than three-quarters of interview participants believed that the university had done
an excellent job of establishing a campus culture that supports cultural diversity and intercultural
integration. US-F-2 stated,
I feel like they’ve really embraced cultural diversity with the way that the school is
organized. The way our courses are organized. I mentioned very robust discussion, even
small classrooms and just the way that our campus is set up, and the way that we even
20.5%
31.3%
29.5%
13.4%
4.5%
0.9%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 4.47
Std.D: 1.14
23.7%
30.3% 30.3%
1.3%
13.2%
1.3%
0.0%
42.1%
31.6%
15.8%
10.5%
0.0%
29.4%
23.5% 23.5%
5.9%
17.6%
0.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Disagree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: China-4.58 US-4.53 Other-4.00
Std.D: China-1.10 US-1.24 Other-1.08
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 124

live in our dormitories is really thought out. They really try to mix people and make it
come into contact with things that they’re not comfortable with so that they can become
comfortable and learn in that way.
China-F-2 also stated,
I definitely think that LUC is doing a great job because LUC itself is being very open-
minded towards everything and they really want to encourage diversity no matter it’s
about culture or like diversity about an individual, your personalities or stuff.
Based on the data, participants recognized LUC’s success in establishing a campus
culture of diversity, but there are still some international participants who were not satisfied.
More than 20 survey and interview participants have offered suggestions for improving campus
culture. DC-M-3 said he was confused about the identity of students enrolled at LUC. One of the
key reasons that they chose LUC was its affiliation to the world-famous university in the United
States that co-founded LUC and the implied education quality and prestige. However, if
technically LUC’s students are not considered students of the foreign university partner, there
should be a shared identity that is clearly articulated and embraced to give students a strong
sense of belonging. He believed that the university needed to put together many “little things,”
such as the mascot, theme color, and motto, to form an identity that can unite all students.
Four interview participants discussed the new diversity statement that was being
developed by LUC and believed it would be an important statement that would help form and
strengthen the institutional culture of embracing cultural diversity. The LUC statement on
diversity and inclusion was officially released in December 2019 and states,
LUC welcomes passionate, creative, and intellectually-driven students, faculty, and staff
from all walks of life, from all over the world. We affirm the diverse histories,
perspectives, experiences, identities, languages, and cultures that enhance our
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 125

community, and we aim to create an environment where all members of our community
are accepted, appreciated, and celebrated. Our commitment to inclusivity is grounded in
the university’s mission. LUC is a community where those who study, live, and work see
a difference as an opportunity for meaningful dialogue, creative expression, and
innovative thinking. The university aspires to foster mutual respect and understanding
among and for all people, regardless of differing cultures, ethnicities, races, religions,
genders, sexual orientations, ages, national origins, socio-economic backgrounds,
capabilities, or any other category that can be used to divide people. Our uniquely vibrant
cultural community is designed to cultivate informed and engaged citizens of the world.
US-M-1 stated, “I think it shows that they really care, that embracing other cultures is really
crucial to how LUC sees the future of education.”
Finding 2: The Small but Diverse Community Supports Intercultural Integration
LUC adopted the liberal arts education model featuring small enrollment size and high
faculty-to-student ratio. The small but diverse community was perceived by participants as a
strong factor in facilitating intercultural integration. China-F-3 stated, “Because we only have
more than 200 students in this class and they are from 27 different countries, we have classes
together and we do projects together. So it’s kind of like I didn’t really have to try that hard to
get out to know students and to make friends from different countries.” US-M-1 stated, “It’s
funny because it’s like the kind of small community that LUC is, even if you despise somebody,
you can’t avoid seeing them anyway. So you kind of have to like them to some extent.” DC-M-3
stated, “You feel close to faculty, you feel close to the community as a whole because you get to
talk and to know everyone.” China-F-4 said, “I think one main character of the LUC campus is
where you go, you say hello to everyone. It’s not someone, you know, but everyone you meet. I
think it’s really a great atmosphere for us.”
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 126

Based on interview data, it was widely recognized by participants from different cultural
backgrounds that the small size of the community under the liberal arts college model is an
effective organizational factor facilitating intercultural integration.
Finding 3: Categorization by Chinese and International Perceived Negative for Integration
DC-M-3 expressed the opinion that a simple categorization of Chinese and international
students added too much emphasis on it and ignored the cultural diversity among international
students. He stated,
I feel that that’s the first thing that when we come in orientation is like, oh, international
students this and Chinese students this, that’s how it starts, putting people in a category.
Again, I know that it’s for practicality, but among international students, there’s so much
diversity from country to country.
That said, he did recognize that for practical reasons, the university needed to make that
categorization, but it might strengthen the stereotypes about Chinese and international students
and indirectly worsen division and segregation between the two groups. A female Chinese
survey participant suggested, “Do not emphasize Chinese students and international students.”
China-F-2 expressed a similar opinion that sometimes non-Chinese Asian students or Chinese-
looking students who are not Chinese were just assumed to be Chinese and spoken to in Chinese,
which was not a comfortable experience for them. US-F-2 said there were some classes only for
Chinese students and classes only for international students. DC-M-3 talked about a debate
between himself and Chinese students over whether international students were enjoying more
preferential treatment in terms of tuition and scholarships. In China, college tuition needs to be
approved by the provincial pricing authority, so, at LUC, the nominal tuition standard for
Chinese students is only about half of that for international students. However, Chinese students
and international students get different levels of need-based and merit-based scholarships. It does
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 127

not matter who is right about whether Chinese students or international students are paying more
for their education at LUC, the problem is this type of double-track arrangements are negatively
influencing the division between Chinese and international students.
Finding 4: A Higher Percentage of International Students Is Preferred
In the current sophomore class, international students (non-Chinese students by
citizenship) accounted for about 30%. The composition of the student body is an important factor
influencing the diversity and culture on the campus. Specific survey items and interview
questions were created to understand the perspectives of the students. There were 67.9% of
survey participants who agreed or strongly agreed that LUC should have more international
students, with only 6.3% responded negatively (Figure 47). All three participant groups were
very positive on this statement, including the dominant Chinese participant group (Figure 48).
However, the mean of Chinese participants is lower than those of the United States and Other
International participants. It is noticeable that Other International participants presented the
highest mean and lowest standard deviation, which indicated their strong preference for
increasing the number of international students.

Figure 47. I think there should be more international students at LUC.
29.5%
38.4%
25.9%
5.4%
0.9%
0.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 4.90
Std.D: 0.92
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 128

Figure 48. I think there should be more international students at LUC (by nationality group).

China-M-2 suggested that a higher percentage of international students would provide
more chances for Chinese students to speak English out of the classrooms and hence increase
intercultural experiences. Five survey participants (three from China and two from the United
States) suggested having more international students in the class as well.
Classroom Climate Facilitating Intercultural Integration
As introduced in Chapter Two, to help students grow into global citizens, it is critical to
have a classroom climate that not only promotes cultural diversity and pluralism but also
encourages and facilitates intercultural integration. It will be helpful to understand and assess the
degree to which students perceive the classroom climate at LUC as supporting intercultural
integration. Merriam and Tisdell (2015) identified four fundamental aspects of classroom
climate: stereotypes, tone, faculty-student and student-student interactions, and course content.
Three findings related to this influence were identified and discussed below.

21.1%
42.1%
28.9%
6.6%
1.3%
0.0%
52.6%
36.8%
10.5%
0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
41.2%
23.5%
29.4%
5.9%
0.0% 0.0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: China-4.75 US-5.00 Other-5.42
Std.D: China-0.91 US-0.97 Other-0.67
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 129

Finding 1: The Curriculum Effectively Supports Intercultural Communication
Survey data show that 62.5% of survey participants agreed or strongly agreed that LUC’s
curriculum helped students have better intercultural interactions (Figure 49). Only 11.6%
responded negatively.

Figure 49. The curriculum at LUC has helped me learn more about how to work with people
from different cultures.

According to the published bulletin of LUC’s undergraduate education, the first of the
seven principles guiding the curricular design is “rooted globalism” which is reflected in the
course setup. There are three required core courses for all undergraduate students. “China in the
World” is one of them. Six interview participants (three Chinese and three international) stated
that this course was beneficial for them to have in-depth intercultural communications and learn
about others’ different perspectives. US-F-1 stated,
It’s very, very interdisciplinary. You learn about China’s place in the world in terms of
economics, history and et cetera. Because this is a course that everybody at LUC has to
take as a freshman, you really get to talk about this class outside of the classroom with
pretty much everyone. Like, “Oh, what did you think of the lecture in G China 101
26.8%
35.7%
25.9%
8.9%
1.8%
0.9%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 4.74
Std.D: 1.06
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 130

today?” …We can differently learn about each other’s opinions depending on people’s
cultures. Plus, I just think the course is interesting.
DC-F-1 stated,
It helped the interactions. The discussions were good because I learned a lot about
Chinese opinions and how some opinions are so different from mine and how history is
taught to me and how history is taught to Chinese students or people from other places
and things. It’s a different perspective.
OECD-M-1 stated,
I took China in the World course last year, and there were little bits where Chinese
students and international students were butting heads because it’s a clash of worldviews
a little bit, and both sides have to realize, “Oh, I’ve been living with this perception of
things.” And they have to lay off a bit to realize, “Okay, what I’m saying is right and
what else I’m saying is wrong.”
China-M-1 stated,
We have final projects when we work together, no matter what cultural background
you’re from. It’s just all about sharing insights and views on the same topic. So that really
encouraged us to talk about the stuff we discussed in class. There were a lot of
international students who held different views which might be due to cultural differences
or the cultural backgrounds they grew up in. I think that’s really interesting.
China-F-3 thought the course gave Chinese students who are usually quieter the confidence to
speak up in class. In addition to the “China in the World” course, five interview participants also
reported that all the courses in social sciences were helpful in terms of facilitating intercultural
communication. In contrast, natural science courses were considered relatively less interactive.

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 131

Finding 2: Professors and the Pedagogy Facilitate In-class Intercultural Interactions
LUC’s liberal arts education emphasizes both faculty-student and student-student
interactions in classrooms and requires faculty to have a strong ability to manage classroom
dynamics. There were 88.4% of survey participants who agreed or strongly agreed that their
professors encouraged them to have intercultural interactions in classrooms.

Figure 50. Professors at LUC encourage students to have interactions with classmates from
different cultures.

US-M-1 stated,
I think any class that involves a group project here helps us integrate with students from
other cultural backgrounds because the professors are really good at ... They don’t let us
pick our own groups. Usually, they assign us and they do an outstanding job of assigning
students with all other backgrounds.
China-F-4 stated,
We have many assignments that the professor needs us to work with different
background students. Usually, they will try to put different background students into one
group so that you will learn more from them.
42.0%
46.4%
8.0%
2.7%
0.9%
0.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 5.26
Std.D: 0.79
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 132

DC-M-1 added, “Professors did a really good job of keeping everything in check and just making
sure that nobody gets into a tense argument and we just tie everything back to the course, and I
think they do a good job.” China-F-4 said she appreciated professors and classmates for their
patience and encouraging attitude despite her English deficiency.
Another interesting issue that emerged from interviews was that some international
students at LUC believed that professors gave Chinese students better grades for their English
essays simply because English is their second language, and the professors would like to
encourage them in this way. Some international students felt unfairly treated because they did
not get better grades as encouragement in mathematics or science classes where the Chinese
students were better academically prepared than international students. Although professors have
formally clarified that the rumor was false, this issue indicates that the academic gaps between
Chinese and international students are presenting a challenge in the classroom not only for
faculty but also for students.
Finding 3: Political Topics Are the Major Challenge for In-class Discussion
Kelly (2008) argued that diversity in the classroom could be a double-edged sword that
brings both creativity and conflicts. In general, participants were satisfied with their classroom
experiences in terms of learning about different cultural perspectives as well as collaborating
with classmates in group projects. However, there were issues and tensions. Five survey
participants talked about in-class tension caused by the discussion about politics, particularly
Chinese politics, in which students from different cultural backgrounds had different
perspectives. China-F-4 stated that some Chinese students had conflicts with international
students or even professors about some Chinese internal political issues. OECD-F-1 stated,
Last year, one student just posted on QQ that international students don’t know anything
about Chinese culture, so they shouldn’t talk about Chinese politics when they don’t
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 133

know anything. So I felt like after that I got more sensitive about just talking about that
kind of sensitive topics in general.
DC-M-1 said that in a religion class, students have many different opinions about Xinjiang, and
the discussion was very tense. However, US-M-1 believed that students were still able to keep
the debate friendly,
I think it’s possible for people to still be friends. I remember last year there was one time
in one of my classes, where the topic of race came up and people of different
backgrounds had different ideas as to what race was. But it was still, it was just a friendly
debate afterward.
China-F-4 reported that despite potential conflict or tension, she felt encouraged to express her
own opinions without worries.
Effective Extracurricular Programs Promoting Intercultural Integration
Participation in extracurricular programs and activities is also beneficial for the
integration of domestic and international students (Peacock & Harrison, 2009). Pascarella et al.
(2005) pointed out that extracurricular involvement is one of the advantages of liberal arts
colleges. LUC has adopted the liberal arts education model for its undergraduate education, and
its enrollment size is comparable to a liberal arts college in the United States. It is crucial to
examine whether the extracurricular programs and activities at LUC were planned and designed
in a way to facilitate students’ intercultural integration and how students perceive the
effectiveness and adequacy of the extracurricular activities. Three findings related to this
influence have been identified and will be discussed below.

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 134

Finding 1: Students Are Satisfied With Student Affairs’ Effort in Promoting Intercultural
Integration
Two survey items have been designed to respectively measure the effectiveness and
adequacy of extracurricular programs and activities offered at LUC. There were 54.4% of survey
participants agreed or strongly agreed that the programs offered by Student Affairs could
effectively promote cultural diversity (Figure 51). Only 16.1% responded negatively. Among the
three nationality groups (Figure 52), Chinese students are most satisfied, with only 6.6%
negative response and the highest mean of 4.8, followed by Unites States (29.4%, 4.29) and
Other International participants (42.1%, 3.63). There were 66% of survey participants who
agreed or strongly agreed that there are sufficient extracurricular programs that help them
develop intercultural abilities (Figure 53). According to the breakdown of responses by
nationality group (Figure 54), Chinese students are most satisfied, with only 11.8% responding
“disagree” or “strongly disagree,” and the highest mean of 4.91, followed by participants from
the United States (23.5%, 4.18) and Other International participants (31.6%, 3.84).

Figure 51. The student affairs programs at LUC effectively promote cultural diversity.

20.5%
33.9%
29.5%
10.7%
4.5%
0.9%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 4.53
Std.D: 1.12
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 135

Figure 52. The student affairs programs at LUC effectively promote cultural diversity (by
nationality group).

Figure 53. LUC provides sufficient extracurricular opportunities for me to develop abilities to
work with people from different cultures.

23.7%
39.5%
30.3%
6.6%
0.0% 0.0%
5.3%
15.8%
36.8%
26.3%
10.5%
5.3%
23.5%
29.4%
17.6%
11.8%
17.6%
0.0%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: China-4.80 US-4.29 Other-3.63
Std.D: China-0.87 US-1.40 Other-1.18
20.5%
45.5%
17.0%
9.8%
6.3%
0.9%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 4.62
Std.D: 1.15
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 136

Figure 54. LUC provides sufficient extracurricular opportunities for me to develop abilities to
work with people from different cultures (by nationality group).

Knowledge of cultural differences is a key element of intercultural competency. Survey
participants were asked about their opinions on whether LUC offers helpful programs for them to
gain more knowledge of cultural differences. There were 67.8% of participants chose “agree” or
“strongly agree,” and only 14.3% responded negatively (Figure 55). According to the breakdown
of responses to the statement by nationality group (Figure 56), Chinese participants were most
satisfied, with only 7.9% responding negatively, and the highest mean of 4.97, followed by
participants from the United States (23.6%, 4.29) and Other International (31.6%, 3.79).
26.3%
50.0%
11.8% 11.8%
0.0% 0.0%
5.3%
36.8%
26.3%
5.3%
21.1%
5.3%
11.8%
35.3%
29.4%
5.9%
17.6%
0.0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: China-4.91 US-4.18 Other-3.84
Std.D: China-0.92 US-1.25 Other-1.39
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 137

Figure 55. LUC offers helpful programs for students to gain knowledge of cultural differences.

Figure 56. LUC offers helpful programs for students to gain knowledge of cultural differences
(by nationality group).

Interview participants also expressed their appreciation for the effort made by Student
Affairs and recognized the effectiveness of their work. US-F-2 stated that Student Affairs
worked really hard to overcome the separation between Chinese students and international
students to make sure they blend better. OECD-M-1 stated,
From what I’ve observed and from what I’ve been hearing from teachers and students
alike, is that they [Student Affairs] are trying very hard, and even though there are a few
21.4%
46.4%
17.9%
8.0%
4.5%
1.8%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
Mean: 4.67
Std.D: 1.14
27.6%
50.0%
14.5%
7.9%
0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
47.4%
21.1%
5.3%
15.8%
10.5%
17.6%
29.4% 29.4%
11.8% 11.8%
0.0%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Strongly agree Agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Disagree Strongly disagree
China Other International United States
Mean: China-4.97 US-4.29 Other-3.79
Std.D: China-0.86 US-1.23 Other-1.44
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 138

hiccups, that doesn’t mean that they’re failing, not by a long shot. I think that they are
doing a good job. It’s just that people like to focus on the bad things because that’s more
interesting, and that grabs your attention.
Interview participants also gave examples of events organized by Student Affairs or in
collaboration with faculty that effectively help students mix better, such as weekly field trips on
Fridays, the China Quest, language tables, international festivals, movie nights, the Color Run,
among others. Four interview participants talked about the initiative started by Student Affairs
that Chinese students were encouraged to bring home one or two international students to spend
the Chinese New Year holiday which is about a week long. Since the Chinese New Year holiday
usually falls into the first term of the spring semester, most international students could not go
back to their home countries in this relatively short break. Many Chinese students responded and
joined the initiative. It turned out to be a very productive opportunity for Chinese and
international students to deepen their mutual understanding and form a close friendship. US-F-2
recalled her experience:
So [a female Chinese classmate] invited another international student and me to her home
for Chinese New Year. That was amazing. It was so much fun. We got to meet all of her
family, her parents and her grandparents and some of her cousins and aunts and uncles. It
was really a great experience. They were laughing at us as we were trying to use
chopsticks while we were eating dinner and all that stuff. We went to all these different
places. I just had a great time. Honestly, I feel like it was more of she shared her home to
us kind of. She shared her family with us in that way.... I still remember that. I still have
pictures and we’re still friends to this day, and now we all work together, so it’s fun. It’s
fun being able to share those experiences overall.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 139

Five interview participants also discussed the program called China Quest, which provided
opportunities for undergraduate students to travel to different places in China for cultural
experiences. The program was funded by the university, and students were required to form pairs
of one Chinese and one international student to enter a lottery for participation. DC-M-2 stated,
I think it’s a perfect, perfect event. Well, not an event, a trip for cultural integration. I
think that’s a perfect example of what LUC is doing about it. And it’s, per-say, a costly
experiment, but the fact that they are doing such a specific experiment means that they
actually care about integrating cultures.
China-F-3 stated,
All of my friends told me that it was almost the first time when they feel that they really
are genuine friends with international students, like they’re sitting together and having
food together and talking about interesting things together, and that just makes them feel
really at home.
US-F-2 said that the Counseling and Psychological Service under Student Affairs also did a good
job of helping students become more comfortable when they face intercultural challenges.
Finding 2: Student-run Clubs Are Effective in Helping Students’ Intercultural Collaboration
Interview participants also believed that student clubs support intercultural integration.
There were 56 student clubs at LUC, and all of them were founded and managed by students
with funding support from the university. Clubs reported by interview participants included
dance club, choir club, book club, Latino club, the Society of Black Global Scholars, Model
United Nations, badminton club, soccer club, just to name a few. US-M-1 stated, “I think any of
the sports clubs promote intercultural interactions, especially like the football team and the
running club, because the idea of working together as a team to have one common goal always
gets people working together.”
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 140

Finding 3: Academic Pressure Is Holding Back Students from More Participation in
Extracurricular Activities
As discussed above, interview and survey participants were generally satisfied with the
effectiveness and adequacy of extracurricular activities available at LUC. However, three
interview participants expressed the opinion that the academic workload and pressure have been
somewhat overwhelming in the freshman year, which resulted in less participation in campus
activities than they hoped. A female Chinese survey participant noted that Chinese students
spend more time on coursework, and many stay up late at night studying, and if the pace of 7-
week terms could be slower, they would have more time to attend social activities with
international students. A male survey participant from the United States considered studying the
biggest divider and suggested the university to incentivize intercultural mixing more than
studying. China-F-3 stated,
But then as the semester moves on, we just kind of started worrying about GPA, we’re
worried about coursework. We are running after deadlines and as you might know that
the academic pressure at LUC is actually quite enormous and the courses are actually
very challenging….we all have different schedules, agendas and priorities ... the
opportunity that we can actually see each other and talk with each other and do things
together become less and less that at some point you are not even having cultural
communications within your own cultural group.
China-F-1 also stated that, due to the pressure of assignments, she was not able to invest as much
time in extracurricular activities as she wanted. In addition to Chinese participants, OECD-F-1
also echoed the same feeling. In general, it seems that Chinese students at LUC paid more
attention to and spent more time on academics than international students, which resulted in less
involvement in extracurricular activities.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 141

Finding 4: Perceived Differences in Academic Strength and Preferences Between Chinese and
International Students
Based on data from interview participants, Chinese students at LUC are perceived to be
better prepared in high schools for science courses and tend to take more science courses at
LUC, but international students are perceived to have better English proficiency and choose
more social science courses in which they perform better. These differences in academic
preparedness and preferences became a negative factor for students’ satisfaction with learning
experiences. The entailed discontent on grading and imbalanced course registration has become a
divider and might compromise students’ integration. For example, China-F-3 said,
I guess the science courses like math and integrated science were very controversial. Lots
of Chinese students reported that they found the courses over repetitive because a lot of
the materials have been covered in our high schools. The only new thing they’re learning
is vocabulary …but some of my international classmates are having difficulty with the
problems.
This observation was also reported by an international interview participant. OECD-M-1 stated,
The science course is very heavily geared with the idea that the students have taken high
school in the mainland Chinese style, in which they’ve done a lot of STEM subjects. And
so, when international students get there, odds are they’re going to look at this like, “Wait
a minute, I haven’t done this yet. I have the requirements for the class, but this is going so
fast, it’s so complicated”…it’s hard to be fair when you’re preparing for one outcome…
And also, the reverse is true for classes that are also taught in English because a lot of the
Chinese students, they still need to work on their English, that’s why they’re here. But the
international students usually have a better grip on English…so when you go to history
class, and you hear some horrible 10-syllable word, the Chinese students have to work
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 142

much harder, and then you have to put in a lot more effort and focus to keep up with that,
rather than the international students who can type out a 10-page essay easy.
In addition, this imbalance has caused concerns over the fairness of the course design. A Chinese
female survey participant commented,
The design of the courses should be improved. Currently, the science courses are mainly
taken by Chinese students while most of the social science courses are taken by
international students. The difficulty of courses should be designed to encourage both
Chinese and international students to take courses out of their “comfort zone” and try
new things.
OECD-F-1 discussed the rumor that Chinese students were getting extra grades in social science
classes simply because their English proficiency was not as good. She said,
It was just a rumor, and then there was a lot of pent up anger among international
students for putting us in the same classroom as those Chinese students who are really
math and science geniuses. So we felt like if they’re going to give them better grades in
English essays, why not extra credit on math classes for us, you know? But I feel like ... I
think it was brought up to the university leadership, actually. But I mean, what can they
actually do, you know?
Summary of Organizational Findings
In general, participants recognized that LUC established a campus culture that embraces
and supports cultural diversity and intercultural integration. The establishment of the DIAB and
the recently released diversity statement were considered pivotal for the campus culture. The
small-size community of LUC was both culturally diverse and close. However, categorizing the
students into two groups (Chinese versus international) in the daily operation made students feel
segregated. Some government and university policies applicable to Chinese and international
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 143

students, such as the tuition and financial aid standards, were different, which exacerbated
division and caused concerns over fairness. It was a shared perception by both Chinese and
international participants that if LUC could increase its percentage of international students,
intercultural experiences would be improved.
The university’s liberal arts education model and the curriculum designed to cultivate
rooted globalism were well recognized by participants to effectively facilitate the development of
intercultural capabilities. The faculty paid due attention to intercultural interactions in the
classrooms and had been purposely making pedagogical arrangements to facilitate. All students
were encouraged to participate in classroom discussions and express their opinions. However,
when it comes to political topics, the atmosphere could be tense. Some interview participants
said they were able to keep the debate friendly, but not all of them. Since Chinese students and
international students went through very different high school curricula, their preparedness in
various subjects could be quite different. In general, Chinese students were perceived to be better
prepared in natural science courses while international students were perceived to feel more
comfortable in social science and humanity courses where in-class discussion and writing were
more emphasized. These differences had caused an imbalance in class registration and
undermined the opportunities for in-class intercultural interactions.
Participants were generally satisfied with the work by Student Affairs in terms of
organizing various extracurricular activities for the purpose of promoting intercultural
integration. Both the effectiveness and adequacy of these activities were well perceived by
participants. The student-run clubs were also well participated by students and playing an
important role. However, many participants felt that the academic pace was too fast, and the
pressure was too high for them to invest more time into extracurricular engagement or social
activities.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 144

Summary of Results and Findings
Survey and interview data show that undergraduate students at LUC were motivated to
experience different cultures and had the fundamental knowledge and skills required for
intercultural integration. Participants acknowledged the university’s success in establishing a
campus culture that embraces and encourages integration. Faculty were perceived as attentive to
in-class intercultural collaboration among students. The student programs were also well
accepted as effective and sufficient in facilitating intercultural integration. The key findings have
supported the validation of all assumed KMO influences. However, based on the interview data,
there were areas where further improvement could be made. More trainings are needed to help
students further improve their intercultural communication skills. The percentage of international
students was perceived as low. The students at LUC did not yet have a clear group identity that
could enable a better unity and sense of belonging. Misunderstanding and prejudice, particularly
in political opinions, were compromising integration both in and out of the classrooms, and
imbalanced academic preparedness and course enrollment may act as a divider and needed to be
addressed.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 145

CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS
As discussed in previous chapters, LUC is one of nine existing joint-venture universities
with independent legal status in China. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the degree to
which LUC is achieving its goal of cultivating global citizens and leaders through offering a
campus environment that supports intercultural integration and effectively fosters students’
intercultural competence. To validate the presence of the assumed KMO influences, surveys and
interviews were conducted with the focused stakeholder group of sophomore students at LUC.
Twenty-seven key findings were identified under nine assumed KMO influences. In this chapter,
recommendations are presented for the purpose of further improving the students’ intercultural
integration in areas where gaps still exist. Implementation and evaluation plans for these
recommended solutions are also suggested.
Recommendations and Implementation Plan
Based on the findings discussed in Chapter Four, eight of the nine assumed KMO
influences have been validated and one was partially validated, which means that these
conditions that were believed to be pivotal for achieving students’ intercultural integration were
present at LUC. In general, LUC has been successful in terms of creating a campus environment
that embraces and encourages cultural diversity. The students have the necessary cultural
knowledge, skills and motivation to adapt to cultural differences and integrate with classmates
from different cultural backgrounds. However, there are specific areas where improvement could
be made. In the following sections, five recommendations are suggested for LUC to better
facilitate intercultural integration among students. Suggestions on how to implement the
recommendations are also discussed.
Table 13 provides an overview of the recommendations and how they are tied to the
findings from the research and the assumed KMO influences. Note that, in the following
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 146

sections, the recommendations are presented related to the knowledge, motivation or
organizational influences rather than importance or priority.
Table 13
Overview of Recommendations
KMO Assumed Influences Relevant Findings Recommendations
Knowledge Skills to effectively communicate
and collaborate with classmates
from different cultural
backgrounds
There are not
meticulously planned
and organized
workshops or lectures
focusing on cultural
knowledge and skills
Offer systematic co-
curricular cultural
programs
Motivation Students need to have an inherent
interest in and enjoyment of
learning and experiencing
different cultures through
intercultural interactions with
classmates
Prejudice, stereotypes
and racism are dividing
students
Students hope the
university leadership
could learn more about
what students have to
say
Organize regular
roundtable dialogues
among administrators,
faculty and students
Organizational The school needs to establish a
classroom climate that
encourages and facilitates
students’ intercultural integration
Differences exist in
academic strength and
preference of Chinese
and international
students
Develop pedagogical
strategies to strengthen
academic collaboration
and integration among
students
Organizational The school needs to cultivate a
culture of embracing cultural
diversity and encouraging
intercultural integration
A higher percentage of
international students is
preferred
Increase the percentage
of international
students to around 40%
Organizational The school needs to cultivate a
culture of embracing cultural
diversity and encouraging
intercultural integration
Students have
confusion and
ambiguity about their
identity as LUC’s
students
Develop the
institutional cultural
identity

Recommendation One: Offer Meticulously Planned and Organized Co-curricular Cultural
Programs
Survey and interview data indicated that students had the basic knowledge of cultural
differences before joining LUC and have developed cultural awareness and intercultural skills
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 147

during their time on LUC’s campus through interacting with classmates and participating in
extracurricular activities organized by the university. Students found the cultural sessions during
the Orientation Week helpful but did not feel there were sufficient co-curricular programs, such
as workshops or lectures throughout the year, that could help them learn about cultural
knowledge and practical skills to cope with day-to-day conflicts and confusion related to cultural
differences.
Leask and Carroll (2011) argued that it is important for universities to align their co-
curricular programs with the formal curriculum to help students achieve successful intercultural
engagement. Therefore, it is recommended that custom-designed and systematic co-curricular
programs could be offered to all students, especially in the freshman year, to help them build up
their knowledge of cultural differences and improve their intercultural skills. In this way,
students will be better prepared to deal with cultural shocks and more confident to have
intercultural experiences with fewer misunderstandings or confusion. The programs might take
different forms, such as workshops, lectures, guest speeches, debates, field trips, just to name a
few. It could also be considered to develop one or more week-long “mini-term” courses focusing
on cultural knowledge with pass-or-fail credits. MOOC platforms, such as Coursera, where a
large number of free online courses are available could also be leveraged by recommending or
even requiring students to complete by themselves. The key point is that these programs should
be meticulously designed and implemented in a concerted way with clear goals of learning so
that collectively they will enable students to acquire cultural knowledge and skills to develop
intercultural competency.
In addition, the student advising staff should develop their own knowledge about cultural
differences and skills for cultural adaptation before they could effectively help students. As
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 148

pointed out by Lin and Liu (2019), they should focus on their ability of broader intercultural
brokering rather than overly emphasizing adaptation to the Chinese culture.
Table 14 provides suggestions on action steps, responsible personnel and timeline to
support the successful implementation of this recommendation.
Table 14
Implementation Plan for Recommendation One
Offer Systematic Co-curricular Cultural Programs
Actions Proposed Responsible Staff Timeline
Academic Affairs appoints a task force to conduct
research on:
• What are the knowledge and skill gaps on the
student side?
• What are the resource and capacity gaps on the
school side?
• What are peer institutions’ best practices?
• What pilot programs should LUC offer?
• What financial and human power investments are
needed?

• Vice Chancellor for
Academic Affairs
• Dean of Undergraduate
Studies
• The task force consisting
of staff from Language
and Culture Center,
Academic Advising,
Teaching and Learning
Center, and Student
Affairs
About 90 days
for research and
proposal
development
The proposal submitted by the taskforce should be
reviewed and discussed by the Faculty Council.
After modifications are made according to Faculty
Council’s feedback, approval should be acquired.
• The Faculty Council of
LUC
• The taskforce

30–45 days for
review and
approval

Academic Affairs leadership approves the proposal
and makes the budget and human resources
arrangement accordingly.
• Vice Chancellor for
Academic Affairs
• Dean of Undergraduate
Studies
10–15 days for
approval

The task force works with relevant departments to
implement the proposed programs with Language
and Culture Center being the owner of the on-going
operation of the programs
• The taskforce
• Language and Culture
Center
Programs are
offered in all
four years with
an emphasis on
freshman year

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 149

Recommendation Two: Organize Regular Roundtable Dialogues Among Administrators,
Faculty and Student
As found in interviews, in general, students are satisfied with the effort made by the
university to create an environment embracing cultural diversity. However, it was suggested that
the university should go further than creating a culturally diverse student body and organizing
events and activities to facilitate intercultural mixing. Cultural diversity could bring interesting
and inspiring experiences, but it could also cause conflict, misunderstanding and division. The
university should take a further step to look at the issues that emerged from intercultural
interactions both in and out of the classrooms and take coordinated actions to address these
issues. For example, students have confusion about why some policies are not consistent
between Chinese students and international students and hope they can have more opportunities
for direct communications with the university leadership. In addition, prejudice and
misunderstanding about politics and religion are also dividing the student group. Therefore, it is
recommended that more open dialogues or roundtable discussions between the university
leadership and students, faculty and students, Chinese and international students, should be
organized and normalized on campus.
Naturally, most people tend to avoid sensitive topics that may cause hard feelings or
conflicts. For undergraduate students who do not yet have the life experience or accumulation of
cultural and political knowledge that could enable themselves to think from different
perspectives or speak rationally and convincingly, initial conflicts over sensitive topics may
cause them to disengage from each other. It is even questionable whether all faculty members are
well informed on some of the seemingly sensitive or mysterious questions related to cultures,
religions and politics. As for university leadership, they might be overwhelmed by administrative
responsibilities and overlook communications with students. Of course, open conversations on
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 150

difficult topics could be challenging and less than enjoyable, but confronting the problems and
opening people’s hearts is a long-run solution that will bring many benefits.
To encourage students to speak freely without being judged or worrying about any
consequences, these sessions could take place in smaller groups and in casual and small settings
such as the residence halls, the student activity center or other places that are not set up like a
conference room, classroom or auditorium. For students, it provides occasions for them to speak
their minds without worrying about endangering individual relationships with classmates. It also
helps them get insights from experts, faculty or senior administrators in whom the students have
more confidence so that they will truly hear and think. For faculty, it could be both a learning
experience and a compelling opportunity to extend the liberal arts teaching concepts outside of
the classrooms. For university leadership, it provides channels for them to get first-hand
information about students’ thoughts, needs, frustrations and suggestions, which will help the
leadership team recalibrate and refine strategies and policies of the university. It also provides
opportunities for the leaders to elaborate on the mission and values of the university and their
expectations on students, which will inspire students from different national and cultural
backgrounds to achieve better intercultural integration.
For the dialogues with university leadership, it could be monthly or bi-weekly sessions
attended by the chancellors or deans and interested students, faculty and staff. The sessions
should be positioned clearly as a roundtable open dialogue rather than a blaming and defending
game. For sessions hosted by faculty, it is suggested that faculty with relevant cultural expertise
serve as hosts to discuss cultural differences and specific confusion or conflicts that students
might encounter. Students could be invited to serve as panelists, and the faculty members could
moderate the discussions. For student-centered programs, in addition to group activities that
facilitate intercultural mixing, more programs could be developed to enable students to have
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 151

dialogues about cultural differences. For example, students could be given an assignment to have
a difficult conversation about a topic related to cultural differences with a classmate from
different cultural backgrounds and write about their learnings after the conversation and write
down their feedback or suggestions for each other. The Student Affairs department could take
the lead.
An open dialogue is a good concept. However, if not managed well, it might become
either a mere formality or create more problems. The university administrators hosting the
regular communications with students must have the knowledge, wisdom, patience, empathy and
articulation required to have fruitful and mutually beneficial discussions with students. This type
of communication could easily turn into a complaining and defending game that is painful for
both sides. The leader of the session needs to do a good job of dealing with information
asymmetry and taking discretion in what information is proper for disclosing and what is not. An
experienced and trained staff or faculty could be appointed as the moderator of these sessions.
The situation is similar for the faculty-moderated discussions about cultural differences. The
faculty members must be skillful enough when the discussions come to politics, religion,
stereotypes and nationalism. The faculty should try best to encourage students to speak their
minds while being respectful to others. It might take some time before students gain the
confidence and assurance that speaking about difficult or sensitive topics might be a great
learning experience for themselves. Over time, this type of events have the potential to become a
forum for students to really open their hearts and have inspiring conversations, only when it is
managed and navigated well.
Table 15 shows the suggested implementation plan for this recommendation.

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 152

Table 15
Implementation Plan for Recommendation Two
Organize Regular Roundtable Dialogues among Administrators, Faculty and Students
Actions Proposed Responsible Staff Timeline
• Hold regular roundtable sessions between
university leadership and students
• Compile key takeaways from each session and
develop follow-up action plans
Office of the Chancellors Monthly
• Hold regular faculty-moderated sessions on
selected topics about culture, religion, politics and
other interested topics
• Encourage students to write essays about learnings
and reflections after attending the sessions and
share with others
Academic Affairs Bi-weekly or
monthly
• Create student programs to facilitate intercultural
dialogues
Student Affairs On-going

Recommendation Three: Develop Pedagogical Strategies to Strengthen Academic
Collaboration and Integration Among Students
According to Berry (1985), academic is one of the four dimensions of acculturation for
international students. It was found in the study that differences exist between Chinese students
and international students in terms of their academic strengths and preferences. In general,
Chinese students are better prepared in high school for natural science courses, such as physics,
chemistry, mathematics and biology, and prefer selecting these types of courses. However,
international students have higher English proficiency and are generally stronger in social
science and humanities courses. These gaps have caused tensions in the classrooms at LUC.
Chinese students felt the science courses were less than challenging or rigorous. International
students felt the Chinese students are too quiet in classroom discussions in social science courses
and contribute less in team assignments. Some international students complain that faculty are
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 153

over accommodating Chinese students’ English deficiency in speaking and writing. The
contrasted strengths and weaknesses in natural science and social science courses, students’
preference of choosing courses which they feel more comfortable with, and the desire for higher
GPAs have contributed to the segregation of Chinese and international students in the same
courses as well as the imbalanced registration of specific courses by Chinese and international
students. It was also revealed in the research that natural science courses do not involve much
teamwork. Universities should make an effort to carefully plan, manage and monitor classroom
dynamics to facilitate and even force intercultural engagement (Harrison, 2012; Rienties et al.,
2013; Volet & Ang, 2012). Therefore, it is recommended that LUC develop coping strategies to
address these issues.
Regarding dissatisfaction caused by gaps in academic preparedness in natural science
courses, LUC could consider offering different options for students at different levels of
proficiency. Students could take “placement tests” before class registration to find out which
level is the best fit. In terms of instructional strategy for natural science courses, LUC could
consider adopting the Team-based Learning (TBL) approach which has been experimented
successfully in medical schools in different countries. TBL enables class time to focus on the
application and integration of new knowledge instead of learning conceptual facts (Thompson et
al., 2007). Besides, TBL also promotes active class participation by incentivizing pre-class
preparation and in-class group discussion (Thompson et al., 2007). Wiener, Plass, and Marz
(2009) researched the outcomes of TBL in the first-year curriculum with students at the Medical
University of Vienna. Their research results showed that students’ reactions were highly positive,
and their academic performance as measured by the final exam was significantly higher than
those who did not take the TBL course, and even students who are used to study alone highly
appreciated learning in team. Utilization of TBL in the instructional strategy of natural sciences
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 154

courses is likely to help solve the problems of lacking engagement and integration in natural
science classes. Pre-class learning could also provide opportunities for intercultural collaboration
among students.
It is possible and understandable that some faculty would object to the idea of adopting
TBL due to the requirement of additional effort and disruption to the current syllabus. However,
LUC’s mission statement highlighted the importance of “involving students in innovative
scholarship.” In addition, LUC itself is based on an innovative model of cross-border higher
education partnership. Therefore, it is sensible that most of the faculty would be at least open to
the idea and make a decision based on thorough research and discussion.
To address the issue of unbalanced class registration, faculty advisors and the student
advising team need to educate students, particularly Chinese students, about the importance of
social science and humanities courses in developing their critical thinking and communication
skills which are among the key goals of liberal arts education.
The implementation of this solution will mainly rely on the effort by the faculty team and
the Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL). Led by the CTL, meetings or seminars could be
held to collect faculty’s insights on the issues in question. Existing best practices could be shared
and discussed. New ideas to address the issues should be encouraged as well. Based on the input
from faculty as well as research on experiences in other universities or countries, the CTL should
compile a report with recommendations on pedagogical and curricular strategies.
Table 16 shows the suggestions implementation plan for the above recommendation.

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 155

Table 16
Implementation Plan for Recommendation Three
Develop Pedagogical Strategies to Strengthen Academic Collaboration and Integration
among Students
Actions Proposed Responsible Staff Timeline
• Conduct a feasibility study and develop
fundamental natural science courses suitable for
students with different levels of academic
preparedness
• Design placement tests and operating procedures
Academic Affairs
• Dean of Undergraduate
Studies
• Center for Teaching and
Learning
Six months
• Conduct a feasibility study on the utilization of
TBL
• Develop implementation strategies and procedures
• Syllabus development and faculty training
• Pilot with selected courses
• Assess efficacy before rollout
Academic Affairs
• Dean of Undergraduate
Studies
• Center for Teaching and
Learning
• Academic Assessment
Six months
• Advising students about the importance of taking
a balanced portfolio of natural science and social
science and humanity classes
• Student Advising
• Faculty Advisors
On-going

Recommendation Four: Increase the Percentage of International Students to 40%
Even though the percentage of international students at LUC is much higher than at most
Chinese public universities and joint-venture universities, it was found through surveys and
interviews that both Chinese and international students believed it would be helpful for
intercultural integration if there could be more international students from more different
countries. The fact that Chinese students account for 70% of the student body provided a cultural
comfort zone which might demotivate them from actively engaging with international students.
Razek and Brown (2015) and Ma (2017) noted that Chinese students studying in the United
States were less motivated to integrate with American classmates if there were enough Chinese
students to form a separate social circle. Compared to studying aboard, Chinese students at LUC
do not feel marginalized and have more confidence to participate in classroom discussions and
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 156

extracurricular activities. However, due to the high percentage of Chinese students, some tend to
stay in this cultural comfort zone by speaking Chinese and spending more social time with
fellow Chinese classmates, which makes international students feel excluded and choose to keep
a distance. Besides, even though the sophomore class is composed of students from 27 countries,
most countries other than China and the United States are only represented by one or two
students who might feel marginalized. Moreover, a more balanced mix of Chinese and
international students will enable the university to assign dormitories by pairing up Chinese and
international students, which will enhance intercultural integration (Meza & Gazzoli, 2011).
Based on the above, it is reasonable to consider increasing the percentage of international
students.
According to Regulations on Sino-Foreign Cooperation in Running Schools (MOE,
2003c), for joint-venture universities in China, the percentage of Chinese Mainland students shall
not be less than 50%. Therefore, it is recommended that LUC consider increasing the percentage
of international students to around 40% as a discrete, short-term solution, which will further
improve the cultural diversity of the student body and enable more balanced dynamics of
intercultural interactions. It is not recommended to increase the percentage to 49% (the
maximum allowed by law) all at once because the change might be too significant for the
university operation to adjust for a smooth transition. If the percentage increase turns out to be as
rewarding as expected in a few years, the university could consider further increasing the
percentage if it is believed to be the right thing to do based on research at that time.
Increasing the percentage of international students is not a simple decision to make for a
joint-venture university because it will have an impact on multiple stakeholder groups as well as
the operation of the university. For example, how will it impact the financial budget? How will
prospective Chinese and international applicants and their parents respond to the change? How
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 157

will the Chinese educational authorities see this change? How will it impact the acceptance rate
and quality of admitted international applicants? Therefore, it is recommended that LUC appoint
a project leader to conduct research and draft a comprehensive report for decision making and
implementation. Relevant departments need to be involved in implementation, such as
international enrollment management, finance, human resources, student affairs and the language
and culture center.
To successfully implement the recommendation, various resources are needed. Assuming
the size and nationality mix of the current freshman class remains, increasing the percentage of
international students to 40% means 30 additional seats for international students. To ensure the
acceptance rate and student quality are not compromised by admitting more international
students, the international enrollment management team needs to invest more energy and money
to elevate marketing and recruiting effort in the United States and other countries in the world to
attract more high-quality applications. More staff headcounts might be necessary. The
investment in financial aid might also need to be increased. Besides, all international students at
LUC are required to learn Mandarin in the first two years. Having more international students
will necessitate more Chinese language teachers on the faculty team because the class size at
LUC is less than 20 students for all courses. More international students will also increase the
need for various services, such as visas, bank accounts, cell phones, travel guidance, local
registration, healthcare, just to name a few. Staff positions providing such services might need to
be added.
It is worth noting that a higher percentage of international students means fewer seats will
be given to Chinese students if the total enrollment size is fixed. The competition among Chinese
applicants will be even fiercer. The university needs to be ready to articulate how this change is
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 158

going to benefit the long-term development of the university to the governing educational
authorities and the general public.
Table 17 shows the suggested actions for the implementation of this recommendation.
Table 17
Implementation Plan for Recommendation Four
Increase the percentage of international students
Actions Proposed Responsible Staff Timeline
• Conduct research on implications and resource
requirements:
o Budget
o Staffing
o Publicity
o Student quality
• Draft analysis report
• Office of the Chancellors
• Relevant departments
Two months
• Review by the university leadership team and
approve the proposal
• Office of the Chancellors One month
• Submit to the Board of Trustees for discussion and
approval
• Student Advising
• Faculty Advisors
Two months
• Make preparations in staffing and budget and
develop the student enrollment plan accordingly
• Office of the Chancellors
• Human Resources
• Finance
• International Enrollment
Management
One month

Recommendation Five: Develop the Institutional Cultural Identity
The campus culture and the institutional identity of a university play a vital role in
bonding the students together. The campus culture is supported by many different elements. For
example, most American universities have their own mascots, theme colors, alma mater, motto,
and athletic teams and so on. Besides, there are specific traditional campus-wide events or
festivals that strengthen the students’ sense of belonging and shared values. In general, Chinese
public universities do not have such distinctive campus cultures as American universities, but
most of the students do have a strong sense of belonging supported by the history and the
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 159

reputation of the universities. According to the research findings, most students at LUC, both
Chinese and international, are very satisfied with their educational experiences at LUC.
However, a distinctive and shared cultural identity is still mostly absent. LUC is a very young
university with a history of only seven years. Cultural elements such as mascot, motto and alma
mater might not be considered critical compared to other priorities such as the curriculum,
student recruitment, faculty development, campus construction, among others. Due to the
constraints of small enrollment size and limited sports facilities, the campus athletic culture is
not yet established.
In addition, it was found in interviews that students have confusion about the identity of
the university as well as their own identity as LUC’s students. Even though LUC is operating in
a very similar way as IBCs in other countries, from a legal perspective, it is an independent
Chinese university co-established by a foreign university and a Chinese university. Therefore, it
is challenging to find an optimal balance between its independence and its affiliation with the
foreign university which is the primary source of academic rigor and reputation for LUC. It is
fair to hypothesize that if the branding element of the foreign founding university were removed
from the name of LUC, the attractiveness of LUC would be much lower for both Chinese and
international students. However, according to LUC’s mission statement, the long-term goal of
LUC is to become a comprehensive research university with a core of liberal arts and science
education located in China. Being a thriving branch campus affiliated to the foreign university
does not seem to be the goal. The university leadership needs to wisely strategize LUC’s
relationship with the foreign founding university in the long run. Similarly, LUC’s institutional
cultural identity needs to hit an optimal point that balances its own identity and its relationship
with that of the foreign founding university. The key is to enable LUC to have its own “soul”
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 160

and, at the same time, continue to be organically affiliated to the founding universities in an
advantageous way.
Developing the institutional cultural identity of a university may have a long-term
influence on the university’s future development hence should be taken very seriously. Before
specific elements of the institutional cultural identity could be developed, the university needs to
revisit its mission and development strategies regarding its long-term relationship with the two
founding universities. It is also necessary to understand how the general public, the local
government and the MOE view the identity of the university and what their expectations are. As
key stakeholder groups of LUC, current students and faculty need to be consulted about their
understanding and expectation of the university’s identity and the key features of the campus
culture. Therefore, it is recommended that a task force composed of university leaders, marketing
staff, student and faculty representatives should be formed to conduct the above research. If
needed, external consultants could be engaged as well. After the research, the task force shall
deliver a proposal with recommendations on strategies and action plans. The proposal with
recommendations should be reviewed and approved by the university leadership and the Board
of Trustees. The required financial and staffing investment should also be endorsed.
After approvals are acquired, the task force should start implementing the actions plans of
developing the various components of the institutional cultural identity, such as a revised version
of the mission statement, diversity statement, culture statement, branding strategy, logo system,
theme colors, mascot, alma mater, motto, flags, slogan, signature events and others. Various
approaches could be considered for different elements. For example, design contests could be
held for alma mater, mascot and motto. Professional agencies could be engaged to develop high-
quality creatives according to the principles required by the task force.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 161

Planning and developing various elements of a university’s cultural identity requires
significant financial and other resource investment. The professional design of the mascot, flags,
marketing collaterals, website and merchandise will take both time and money. Campaigns or
design contests for motto, slogan and alma mater will need time and energy from responsible
staff and university leaders. It is also necessary to train staff, faculty and students about the
cultural identity elements in a systematic way to have the concepts and elements recognized and
embraced. The implementation process could be challenging because cultural identity is not
something you can impose on people if they are not willing to embrace it with their hearts.
Besides, it is essential to keep in mind that a university’s cultural identity takes a long time to be
rooted and prosper.
Table 18 shows the suggested implementation plan for this recommendation.
Table 18
Implementation Plan for Recommendation Five
Develop the Institutional Cultural Identity
Actions Proposed Responsible Staff Timeline
• Form a task force to conduct research and give
recommendations
• Draft proposal and report to university leadership
• Office of the Chancellors
• Marketing
• Faculty
• Students
Two months
• Acquire approvals from the leadership and the
Board of Trustees
• Office of the Chancellors Two months
• Develop the elements of the university’s
institutional cultural identity
• Acquire endorsement from university leadership,
students and faculty representatives
• Marketing
• Office of the Chancellors
Six months
• Deploy the cultural identity elements • Office of the Chancellors
• Marketing
One month

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 162

Evaluation Plan
For any implemented solutions to solve specific issues or achieve specific goals, it is
important to have evaluation tools in place to assess the outcomes. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick
(2016) noted three main reasons for evaluation: to justify the decision and investment, to decide
whether the interventions should be continued, and to determine what improvements are needed.
They proposed a four-step sequential evaluation model: reaction, learning, behavior and results
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). This model was created to evaluate the effectiveness of
training programs but is widely considered applicable and useful for evaluations of policy
interventions or solutions in general. While it might not be necessary to apply all of the four
steps of the model for all of the five recommendations mentioned above, the model serves as an
excellent guide for the thinking process of selecting and developing evaluation methods and
tools. Each step of the process takes different evaluation approaches and tools to determine the
success of the solutions.
Level One: Reaction
The first step of the Kirkpatrick model is to evaluate how the key participants involved
react to the implemented solutions. It is important to get a positive reaction from the participants
before we can expect the implementation to be successful because any programs or interventions
would fail if the participants are not engaged and motivated in the first place (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016).
The most commonly used tool for this step is reaction sheets, also called “smile” sheets,
distributed and collected immediately after delivery of the training programs. For solutions in a
different format than training programs, brief interviews or focus groups could also be
considered. This first step is easy to do but nonetheless important because it is the starting point
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 163

of the evaluation process and provides data about participants’ attitudes and motivation, which
directly influence whether the implementation would be successful.
Leven Two: Learning
As the second step of the model, learning is about assessing the extent to which
participants have changed attitudes, improved knowledge and increased skills as a result of the
implemented solutions. At least one of the three changes must take place before any changes in
behavior could occur (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). However, for solutions that are different
from training programs and do not involve any significant learning process, this step of
evaluation might not be applicable.
The most commonly used tools for learning evaluation include paper-and-pencil tests for
knowledge and attitudes, and performance tests for skills (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). It
will be most helpful if a pre- and post-test and control group are used if practical (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). When these tools are not feasible, surveys and interviews could also be used,
but it is important to keep in mind that the survey questions need to be designed deliberately to
evaluate knowledge and skills effectively rather than simply measuring attitudes.
Level Three: Behavior
The third step is to evaluate whether and what behavior changes have occurred as a result
of the implemented solutions. Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) noted that at least one of the
three goals of learning must be achieved before any changes in behavior is possible, so it is not
suggested to skip both the evaluation of reaction and learning and go to the evaluation of
behavior directly.
Similar to learning, when practical, it will be helpful to have pre- and post-test and a
control group. Also, it is important to keep in mind that behavior changes take time, and the
participants’ supervisors and people working with them are the best observers (Kirkpatrick &
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 164

Kirkpatrick, 2016). Surveys, interviews and observations are some of the most often used tools
to evaluate behavior change.
Level Four: Results
The fourth step is to identify the impact on the organization that could be attributed to the
implementation of the solutions. It is important to keep in mind that the desired impact is the
reason that the solutions are proposed in the first place, so the impact should be described in a
way that is consistent with the purposes of the solutions (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Similar to behavior evaluation, a control group and pre- and post-test are also helpful
when practical. It also takes time for results to be visible and measurable. When it comes to
results at the organizational level, it will be essential to perform costs and benefits analysis
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Suggested Evaluation Plan
Based on the discussions above, Table 19 provides an overview of the suggested
evaluation plans for the five recommended solutions.
Table 19
Evaluation Plan for Recommended Solutions
Proposed
Solutions
Reaction
(Level 1)
Learning
(Level 2)
Behavior
(Level 3)
Results
(Level 4)
Offer
systematic co-
curricular
programs
• Use “smile”
sheets at the
end of each
program
• Track
attendance of
different
programs
• Track the
“test” results
of different
programs
• Interview with
students about
examples of their
behavioral change
• Use professional
tools to assess
students’
intercultural
knowledge and
skills
• Interview with
Student Affairs staff
about students’
intercultural
integration
improvement

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 165

Organize
regular open
dialogues at
different levels
• Use “smile”
sheets at the
end of each
event
• Track
attendance of
different events
• Observe the
discussion in
sessions to
understand the
level of
engagement
Not Applicable. • Survey of
students and
hosts (senior
administrative
leaders and
faculty) three
months out about
their satisfaction
and learning
• Informal
interviews with
select students
and hosts about
examples of
change (if any)
• Monitor annual
student surveys and
student publications
about vertical
communication
issues and
complaints about
campus culture
Develop
pedagogical
strategies to
strengthen
academic
collaboration
and integration
among students
• Interview with
students about
their
satisfaction
with the
changes
• Interview with
faculty to
understand
their opinions
on the
effectiveness of
the changes
• Interview with
students to
assess their
commitment
to better
integration in
coursework
• Interview with
faculty to
understand
their level of
confidence to
implement the
strategies
effectively
• Observation of
classes to
understand how
well the
strategies are
applied in
classrooms
• Interview with
students to
understand how
they are
collaborating
with classmates
• Data analysis on
course selection
patterns of Chinese
students and
international
students
• Survey of students
about Chinese and
international
students’ respective
satisfaction of
natural science and
social
science/humanities
classes
Increase the
percentage of
international
students to
around 40%
• Collect
opinions from
prospective
students and
their parents
about their
perception of
LUC’s cultural
diversity
Not Applicable. • Interviews with
Student Affairs
staff about
changes in
students’
intercultural
integration
• Surveys and
interviews with
teaching faculty
about their
observations of
intercultural
integration in and
out of classrooms
• Surveys of
current students
about their
intercultural
mixing
experience
• Survey of current
students and faculty
about their
satisfaction of
cultural diversity at
LUC
• Interviews with
current students
about intercultural
integration
• Professional tools to
assess senior
students’
intercultural
competence before
graduation

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 166

Develop the
institutional
cultural
identity
• Survey of
students and
faculty about
their initial
reactions to
and
perceptions of
the identity
elements
• Survey of
students and
faculty about
their knowledge
and
understanding of
the identity
elements
• Observations of
how well
students have
embraced the
identity elements
• Interviews of
students about
their perceptions
of their identity
as a student at
LUC
• Survey of current
students and faculty
about their
satisfaction with
LUC’s institutional
cultural identity
• Focus group to
understand the
effectiveness of the
institutional cultural
identity and receive
feedback

Limitations of the Study
It is worth discussing two limitations that have constrained this research from generating
more useful insights.
First, this study focused on sophomore students who only had a little more than one year
of campus experience at LUC. As mentioned in Chapter Three, the sophomore students were
chosen to be the focus of this study because they were the inaugural class of undergraduate
students at LUC, and there were no more experienced students than them. The sophomores were
only able to talk about their intercultural experiences that happened during the first year of their
college lives at LUC and no more than that. If there were senior students at LUC, they would be
ideal for this study because more information about how their intercultural experience, attitude
and competency evolve during the years at LUC would be acquired and analyzed, which would
provide more perspectives and insights.
Second, the sample size for international students who are not from the United States was
not big enough for more in-depth analysis. Several dimensions could be used to categorize non-
US international students, such as geography and economic development level. It would be
interesting to look at the differences in survey answers between students from non-Chinese
developing countries and students from non-US OECD countries. Similarly, to compare the
patterns of answers between students from Southeast Asia and South America would also be
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 167

intriguing. However, even though the response rate of the survey was already quite high, there
were only 19 survey participants who are non-US international students. For anonymity and
protection of identity, the international survey participants were only asked to identify
themselves as citizens of the United States or Other Countries/Regions because many non-US
international students are the single representatives of their countries.
Suggestions for Future Research
Joint-venture universities in China have no longer than 16 years of history by 2020. LUC
is a young university that is still in its early stage of development. This study focused on
sophomore undergraduate students and provided data to understand how KMO factors influence
the students’ intercultural integration to develop intercultural competency. It is suggested that
similar research could be conducted on an annual basis at LUC to capture data that can reflect
the changes over the years, which will shed more light on best practices to support the
development of students’ intercultural competency in the context of a joint-venture university
located in China. It will also be fascinating to see comparative researches on other joint-venture
universities and Chinese public universities in the area of intercultural integration. This kind of
research could provide insights on how the differences in student diversity, curriculum,
pedagogy, faculty profile, campus culture and methods of admissions influence students’
intercultural competency. The research results will not only be very meaningful for China’s
higher education reforms but the study of the globalization of higher education in general.
Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences related to the integration of students from different cultural backgrounds at LUC, a
joint-venture university in China created by an American university and a Chinese university.
Based on the literature review, nine assumed KMO influences were identified as important
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 168

factors that could determine the success of students’ intercultural integration in the context of an
SFCU. Surveys and interviews were conducted with the sophomore students at LUC, and the
data were analyzed to validate the assumed influences. From the data analysis, 27 findings were
presented and discussed. Collectively, the findings have validated all of the nine assumed
influences and indicated areas for further improvement.
LUC has been able to position itself in a unique way as an innovative and global
university that combines the advantages of world-class liberal arts education, cultural diversity
and what China, one of the fastest-growing major economies in the world, has to offer. Students,
both Chinese and international, chose LUC for their college education because of its
commitment to world-class education with English as the language of instruction, and its cultural
diversity. In general, students had a relatively high starting point in terms of their cultural
knowledge and awareness. They were able to quickly improve their intercultural knowledge after
joining LUC. The research also revealed that students were highly confident and motivated to
learn about other cultures and integrate with classmates from other cultural backgrounds to
develop their own intercultural competency. The motivation was supported by both their
interests and their recognition of the importance of intercultural competency for their future
career development. In general, students were quite satisfied with the opportunities provided by
LUC for them to gain cultural knowledge and skills. Student Affairs offered sufficient and
effective extracurricular programs focusing on intercultural integration. Faculty were able to
establish a classroom climate that facilitates intercultural communication and collaboration. Most
students believed that LUC was successful in establishing a campus culture that embraces
cultural diversity.
The research also revealed specific areas where LUC could take actions to achieve even
better outcomes in students’ intercultural integration. Accordingly, solutions were recommended
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 169

to create an institutional cultural identity, develop pedagogical strategies to strengthen students’
collaboration and integration, increase the percentage of international students, organize regular
cultural dialogues in different forms, and offer more systematic student programs on cultural
knowledge and skills. Implementation and evaluation plans were also suggested to support the
recommended solutions.
This study has taken place in a period of world economic and political turmoil
highlighted by the trade war between China and the United States, the pandemic of COVID-19
and the entailed political tensions and conflicts. Though there are different opinions on whether
the pandemic marks the end of globalization as we know it, there is no doubt that globalization is
facing the most significant challenge ever. There has never been a time like now when the world
is in such a great need for globalists who can help rebuild the precarious trust and collaboration
among nations. With the world marching into more uncertainty and anxiety, educational
institutions’ role becomes more essential. Cultivating global citizens and leaders is a shared
mission of joint-venture universities in China. May they be the beacons of light in globalization
of higher education in the journey ahead.

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 170

REFERENCES
Adler, P. (1975). The transitional experience: An alternative view of culture shock. Journal of
Humanistic Psychology, 15(4), 13–23. doi:10.1177/002216787501500403
Ahmad, A. B., & Shah, M. (2018). International students’ choice to study in China: An
exploratory study. Tertiary Education and Management, 24(4), 325-337.
doi:10.1080/13583883.2018.1458247
Ahmad, S. Z. (2015). Evaluating student satisfaction of quality at international branch campuses.
Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 40(4), 488-507.
doi:10.1080/02602938.2014.925082
Andrade, M. S. (2006). International student persistence: Integration or cultural integrity?
Journal of College Student Retention, 8(1), 57-81. doi:10.2190/9MY5-256H-VFVA-
8R8P
Arasaratnam, L. A. (2009). The development of a new instrument of intercultural communication
competence. Journal of Intercultural Communication(20).
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman.
Berry, J., Phinney, J., Sam, D., & Vedder, P. (2006). Immigrant youth in cultural transition:
Acculturation, identity, and adaptation across national contexts. New York, NY:
Erlbaum.
Berry, J. W. (1985). Psychological adaptation of foreign students. International Counselling and
Assessment: Global Perspectives. Lewiston: CJ Hogrefe, Inc.
Berry, J. W. (2005). Acculturation: Living successfully in two cultures. International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, 29(6), 697-712.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 171

Bin, Y., Chen, X., Li, S., Liu, Y., Jacques-Tiura, A., J., & Yan, H. (2014). Acculturative stress
and influential factors among international students in China: A structural dynamic
perspective. PLoS ONE, 9(4), e96322. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0096322
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Vol. 1: Cognitive domain. New York:
McKay.
Bodycott, P., Mak, A. S., & Ramburuth, P. (2014). Utilising an internationalised curriculum to
enhance students’ intercultural interaction, engagement and adaptation. Asia-Pacific
Education Researcher, 23(3), 2635-2643. doi:10.1007/s40299-013-0136-3
Bowman, N. A. (2013). How much diversity is enough? The curvilinear relationship between
college diversity interactions and first-year student outcomes. Research in Higher
Education, 54(8), 874-894. doi:10.1007/s11162-013-9300-0
British Council. (2014). Integration of international students—a UK perspective. Retrieved from
https://www.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/oth-integration-report-september-14.pdf
Center for China and Globalization. (2016). Annual report on the development of Chinese
students studying abroad. Retrieved from
http://www.ccg.org.cn/Research/View.aspx?Id=5418
Chataway, C., & Berry, J. (1989). Acculturation experiences, appraisal, coping and adaptation: a
comparison of Hong Kong Chinese, French and English students. Canadian Journal of
Behavioural Science, 21(3), 285-309.
Chen, G., & Starosta, W. J. (2000). The development and validation of the intercultural
sensitivity scale. Human Communication, vol. 3, 2000, pp. 1-15.
Chen, T., & Barnett, G. (2000). Research on international student flows from a macro
perspective: A network analysis of 1985, 1989 and 1995. Higher Education, 39(4), 435-
453. doi:10.1023/A:1003961327009
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 172

Chiang, S. (2015). Cultural adaptation as a sense-making experience: International students in
China. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 16(2), 397-413.
doi:10.1007/s12134-014-0346-4
China Daily. (2017). China has world’s largest higher education system. Retrieved from
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2017-09/28/content_32606890.htm
Choudaha, R. (2017). Three waves of international student mobility (1999–2020). Studies in
Higher Education, 42(5), 825-832.
Church, A. (1982). Sojourner adjustment. Psychological Bulletin, 91(3), 540. doi:10.1037/0033-
2909.91.3.540
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2002). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions: Atlanta, GA: CEP Press.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
Cornett-DeVito, M. M., & Reeves, K. J. (1999). Preparing students for success in a multicultural
world: Faculty advisement and intercultural communication. NACADA Journal, 19(1),
35-44.
Cotton, D. R. E., George, R., & Joyner, M. (2013). Interaction and influence in culturally mixed
groups. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 50(3), 272-283.
doi:10.1080/14703297.2012.760773
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Daly, E. (2006). Behaviorism. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference/article/
behaviorism/
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 173

Deardorff, D. K. (2006). Identification and assessment of intercultural competence as a student
outcome of internationalization. Journal of Studies in International Education, 10(3),
241-266. doi:10.1177/1028315306287002
Dervin, F., Du, X., & Härkönen, A. (2018). International students in China: Education, student
life and intercultural encounters. Cham: Springer International.
Ding, X. (2016). Exploring the experiences of international students in China. Journal of Studies
in International Education, 20(4), 319-338. doi:10.1177/1028315316647164
DKU. (2019). About Duke Kunshan. Retrieved from https://dukekunshan.edu.cn/en/about/duke-
kunshan
Eccles, J. S., Barber, B. L., Stone, M., & Hunt, J. (2003). Extracurricular activities and
adolescent development. Journal of social issues, 59(4), 865-889.
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45-56. doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3601_5
Garrett, R. (2018). International branch campuses: Success factors. 2(93), 14-16.
Garrett, R., Kinser, K., Lane, J. E., & Merola, R. (2016). International branch campuses: Trends
and developments, 2016. London, UK: Observatory on Borderless Higher Education
Gill, S. (2007). Overseas students’ intercultural adaptation as intercultural learning: A
transformative framework. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International
Education, 37(2), 167-183. doi:10.1080/03057920601165512
Glaser, B. G. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory; strategies for qualitative research.
Chicago, IL: Aldine.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 174

Glass, C., & Westmont, C. (2014). Comparative effects of belongingness on the academic
success and cross-cultural interactions of domestic and international students.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations: IJIR, 38, 106.
Glazer, M. (1982). The threat of the stranger: Vulnerability, reciprocity, and fieldwork. In J. E.
Sieber (Ed.), The ethics of social research: Fieldwork, regulation, and publicatiopn (pp.
49-70). New York, NY: Springer.
Glesne, C. (2015). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. London, UK:Pearson.
Gu, Q., Schweisfurth, M., & Day, C. (2010). Learning and growing in a "foreign" context:
Intercultural experiences of international students. Compare: A Journal of Comparative
and International Education, 40(1), 7-23. doi:10.1080/03057920903115983
Hail, H. C. (2015). Patriotism abroad: Overseas Chinese students’ encounters with criticisms of
China. Journal of Studies in International Education, 19(4), 311-326.
doi:10.1177/1028315314567175
Hao, P. (2009). Chairman’s message. China scholarship council annual report. Retrieved from
http://www.csc.edu.cn/uploads/20101008140653820.pdf
Harrison, N. (2012). Investigating the impact of personality and early life experiences on
intercultural interaction in internationalised universities. International Journal of
Intercultural Relations, 36(2), 224-237. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2011.03.007
Harrison, N., & Peacock, N. (2009). Cultural distance, mindfulness and passive xenophobia:
Using integrated threat theory to explore home higher education students’ perspectives on
‘internationalisation at home’. British Educational Research Journal, 36(6), 877-902.
Harrison, N., & Peacock, N. (2010). Cultural distance, mindfulness and passive xenophobia:
using Integrated Threat Theory to explore home higher education students’ perspectives
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 175

on ‘internationalisation at home’. British Educational Research Journal, 36(6), 877-902.
doi:10.1080/01411920903191047
Hendrickson, B., Rosen, D., & Aune, R. K. (2011). An analysis of friendship networks, social
connectedness, homesickness, and satisfaction levels of international students.
International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 35(3), 281-295.
doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2010.08.001
Huang, F. (2007). Internationalization of higher education in the developing and emerging
countries: A focus on transnational higher education in Asia. Journal of Studies in
International Education, 11(3-4), p.421-432. doi:10.1177/1028315307303919
Huang, Y. (2016). Understanding China’s Belt & Road initiative: Motivation, framework and
assessment. China Economic Review, 40, 314-321.
Hyde, C. A., & Ruth, B. J. (2002). Multicultural content and class participation: Do students self-
censor? Journal of Social Work Education, 38(2), 241-256.
doi:10.1080/10437797.2002.10779095
Iftekhar, S. N., & Kayombo, J. J. (2016). Chinese-foreign cooperation in running schools
(CFCRS): A policy analysis. International Journal of Research Studies in Education,
5(4), 73-82.
Institute of International Education. (2019). Open Doors 2018. Retrieved from
https://www.iie.org/en/Research-and-Insights/Open-Doors/Data
Jon, J.-E. (2013). Realizing Internationalization at Home in Korean Higher Education:
Promoting Domestic Students’ Interaction with International Students and Intercultural
Competence. Journal of Studies in International Education, 17(4), 455-470.
doi:10.1177/1028315312468329
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 176

Jon, J.-E., Lee, J. J., & Byun, K. (2014). The emergence of a regional hub: Comparing
international student choices and experiences in South Korea. Higher Education: The
International Journal of Higher Education and Educational Planning, 67(5), 691-710.
doi:10.1007/s10734-013-9674-0
Kelly, P. (2008). Achieving desirable group-work outcomes through the group allocation
process. Team Performance Management: An International Journal, 14(1/2), 22-38.
doi:10.1108/13527590810860186
Kim, Y. Y. (1988). Communication and cross-cultural adaptation: An integrative theory.
Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Kim, Y. Y. (1991). Intercultural communication competence: A systems-theoretic view. Cross-
cultural interpersonal communication, 15.
Kim, Y. Y. (2001). Becoming intercultural: An integrative theory of communication and cross-
cultural adaptation. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Kim, Y. Y. (2008). Intercultural personhood: Globalization and a way of being. International
Journal of Intercultural Relations, 32(4), 359-368. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2008.04.005
Kimmel, K., & Volet, S. (2012). University students’ perceptions of and attitudes towards
culturally diverse group work: Does context matter? Journal of Studies in International
Education, 16(2), 157-181. doi:10.1177/1028315310373833
Kinser, K., & Lane, J. E. (2016). International branch campuses: Evolution of a phenomenon.
International Higher Education, 85, 3–5. doi:10.6017/ihe.2016.85.9232
Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation:
Alexandria, VA: Association for Talent Development.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice,
41(4), 212-218. doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 177

Lambert, R. (1994). Educational exchange and global competence. New York, NY: Council on
International Educational Exchange.
Lawani, A. O., Gai, X., & Titilayo, A. (2012). The effects of continental background, language
proficiency and length of stay on social adjustment experience of international students in
Northern China. Revista de Cercetare si Interventie Sociala, 37, 91-106.
Leask, B., & Carroll, J. (2011). Moving beyond ‘wishing and hoping’: Internationalisation and
student experiences of inclusion and engagement. Higher Education Research &
Development, 30(5), 647-659. doi:10.1080/07294360.2011.598454
Li, H. (2017). Academic integration of Mainland Chinese students in germany. Social Inclusion,
5(1). doi:10.17645/si.v5i1.824
Li, J. (2019). Global Higher Education Shared Communities. New York, NY: Springer.
Li, M., & Bray, M. (2007). Cross-Border Flows of Students for Higher Education: Push-Pull
Factors and Motivations of Mainland Chinese Students in Hong Kong and Macau.
Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education and Educational
Planning, 53(6), 791-818. doi:10.1007/s10734-005-5423-3
Lien, D., & Keithley, A. (2018). The determinants of international branch campuses. Studies in
Higher Education, 1-12. doi:10.1080/03075079.2018.1539961
Lin, X., & Liu, W. (2019). Intercultural advising for Chinese international students: a reflective
inquiry. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 1-11.
doi:10.1080/14767724.2019.1583092
Liu, W., & Lin, X. (2016). Meeting the needs of Chinese international students: Is there anything
we can learn from their home system? Journal of Studies in International Education,
20(4), 357-370. doi:10.1177/1028315316656456
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 178

Lysgaard, S. (1955). Adjustment in a foreign society: Norwegian Fulbright grantees visiting the
United States. International Social Science Bulletin, 7(1), 45-51.
Ma, J. (2017). Why and how international students choose Mainland China as a higher education
study abroad destination. Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher
Education Research, 74(4), 563-579. doi:10.1007/s10734-016-0066-0
Ma, J., & Zhao, K. (2018). International student education in China: Characteristics, challenges,
and future trends. Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education
Research, 76(4), 735-751. doi:10.1007/s10734-018-0235-4
Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (Vol. 41).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
McBurnie, G., & Ziguras, C. (2014). Governing cross-border higher education. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Merrick, B. (2004). Broadening our horizons: International students in UK universities and
colleges. London, UK: UKCOSA.
Meza, V., & Gazzoli, G. (2011). International students’ acculturation and adaptation: The case of
an indigenous group studying in Switzerland. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism
Education, 23(2), 14-22. doi:10.1080/10963758.2011.10697002
Michael, B. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence: Clevedon,
UK: Multilingual Matters.
Miglietta, T. (2009). The influence of length of stay, linguistic competence, and media exposure
in immigrants’ adaptation. Cross Cultural Research, 43(1), 46-61.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 179

Ministry of HR and Social Security. (2017). The administrative Regulation on foreigner’s
employment in China. Retrieved from
http://www.mohrss.gov.cn/SYrlzyhshbzb/zcfg/flfg/gz/201704/t20170413_269433.html
Ministry of Education. (2000). Regulations on management of institutions of higher education in
their acceptance of international students. Retrieved from http://old.moe.gov.cn/
publicfiles/business/htmlfiles/ moe/moe_621/201001/xxgk_81859.html
Ministry of Education. (2003a). The State Council Order #372. Retrieved from
http://www.moe.gov.cn/jyb_xxgk/gk_gbgg/moe_0/moe_9/moe_35/tnull_96.html
Ministry of Education. (2003b). The immplementation procedures of regulation on Chinese
foreign cooperation in running schools. Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/
A02/s5911/ moe_621/200406/t20040602_180471.html
Ministry of Education. (2003c). Regulations on Sino-Foreign Cooperation in running schools.
Retrieved from http://www.gov.cn/test/2005-06/29/content_10930.htm
Ministry of Education. (2012). Statistics on international students in China in 2011. Retrieved
from http://www.moe.gov.cn/jyb_xwfb/gzdt_gzdt/s5987/201202/t20120228_131117.
html
Ministry of Education. (2017a). 2017 National education sector development statistics report.
Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.cn/jyb_sjzl/sjzl_fztjgb/201807/t20180719_
343508.html
Ministry of Education. (2017b). Chen Baosheng: China has become world’s third and Asia’s
largest desitnation for international students. Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.cn/
jyb_xwfb/xw_zt/moe_357/jyzt_2017nztzl/2017_zt11/17zt11_yw/201710/t20171024_317
275.html
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 180

Ministry of Education. (2018). International students in China developing toward higher quality
and higher level. Retrieved from http://www.moe.gov.cn/jyb_xwfb/gzdt_gzdt/s5987/
201803/t20180329_331772.html
Ministry of Education. (2019a). Statistics on people studying abroad in 2018. Retrieved from
http://www.moe.gov.cn/jyb_xwfb/gzdt_gzdt/s5987/201903/t20190327_375704.html
Ministry of Education. (2019c). List of undergraduate Level Sino-Foreign Cooperative
education institutions and programs. Retrieved from http://www.crs.jsj.edu.cn/aproval/
orglists/2
Montgomery, C. (2009). A decade of internationalisation: Has it influenced students’ views of
cross-cultural group work at university? Journal of Studies in International Education,
13(2), 256-270. doi:10.1177/1028315308329790
Nisbett, R. E. (2003). The geography of thought: How Asians and Westerners think differently--
and why. New York, NY: Free Press.
NYU Shanghai. (2019). Who we are. Retrieved from https://www.nottingham.edu.cn/en/about/
strategy-2020/vision-and-mission.aspx
OECD. (2013). How is international student mobility shaping up? IDEAS Working Paper Series
from RePEc.
OECD Centre for Educational Research and Innovation. (2017). Education at a Glance 2017:
OECD Indicators. Paris, France: OECD Publishing.
Pascarella, E. T., Wolniak, G. C., Seifert, T. A., Cruce, T. M., & Blaich, C. F. (2005). Liberal
arts colleges and liberal arts education: New evidence on impacts. ASHE Higher
Education Report, 31(3), 1-148.
Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (4th. ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 181

Peacock, N., & Harrison, N. (2009). "It’s so much easier to go with what’s easy": "Mindfulness"
and the discourse between home and international students in the United Kingdom.
Journal of Studies in International Education, 13(4), 487-508.
doi:10.1177/1028315308319508
People.cn. (2018). The 9th National Conference on Sino-Foreign Cooperative Education
Opened. Retrieved from http://edu.people.com.cn/n1/2018/0920/c1006-30305587.html
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and
applications (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Probst, B., & Berenson, L. (2014). The double arrow: How qualitative social work researchers
use reflexivity. Qualitative Social Work, 13(6), 813-827.
Razek, N., & Brown, J. (2015). Got to socialize? Chinese first year students perceptions of
residence hall climate. Allied Academies International Conference. Academy of
Educational Leadership. Proceedings, 20(2), 22-26.
Rienties, B., Beausaert, S., Grohnert, T., Niemantsverdriet, S., & Kommers, P. (2012).
Understanding academic performance of international students: the role of ethnicity,
academic and social integration. Higher Education, 63(6), 685-700. doi:10.1007/s10734-
011-9468-1
Rienties, B., Nanclares, N. H., Jindal-Snape, D., & Alcott, P. (2013). The role of cultural
background and team divisions in developing social learning relations in the classroom.
Journal of Studies in International Education, 17(4), 332-353.
doi:10.1177/1028315312463826
Robinson, S. B., & Leonard, K. F. (2018). Designing quality survey questions. Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 182

Ruan, D., & Zhu, S. (2015). Birds of a feather: A case study of friendship networks of Mainland
Chinese college students in Hong Kong. American Behavioral Scientist, 59(9), 1100-
1114. doi:10.1177/0002764215580616
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance : finding the right
solutions to the right problems. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Salkind, N. J. (2016). Statistics for people who (think they) hate statistics. Thousand Oaks, CA:
SAGE.
Schlossberg, N. K. (2011). The challenge of change: The transition model and its applications.
Journal of Employment Counseling, 48(4), 159-162. doi:10.1002/j.2161-
1920.2011.tb01102.x
Severiens, S., & Wolff, R. (2008). A comparison of ethnic minority and majority students: social
and academic integration, and quality of learning. Studies in Higher Education, 33(3),
253-266. doi:10.1080/03075070802049194
Simon, M. K., & Goes, J. (2013). Scope, limitations, delimitations, and scope of the study.
Retrieved from https://www.dissertationrecipes.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/
Assumptions-Limitations-Delimitations-and-Scope-of-the-Study.pdf
Spencer-Oatey, H., Dauber, D., Jing, J., & Wang, L. (2017). Chinese students’ social integration
into the university community: Hearing the students’ voices. Higher Education: The
International Journal of Higher Education Research, 74(5), 739-756.
doi:10.1007/s10734-016-0074-0
Spencer-Oatey, H., Dauber, D., & Williams, S. (2014). Promoting integration on campus:
Principles, practice and issues for further exploration. London, UK: UK Council for
International Student Affairs.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 183

Stake, R. E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE
handbook of qualitative research (p. 443–466). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Stanfield, D., & Wang, Q. (2015). Branch campuses in China. International higher education.
69, 13. doi:10.6017/ihe.2012.69.8634
State Council. (1991). Notice on piloting in selected institutions of higher education the interim
methods for higher education institutions to award Chinese degrees to international
students. Beijing, China: Author
State Council. (2010). The national outline for medium and long-term educational reform and
development (2010-2020). Beijing, China: Author.
Student.com. (2016). Record number of students choosing China to study. Retrieved from
https://www.student.com/articles/record-number-students-choosing-china-study/
Thompson, B. M., Schneider, V. F., Haidet, P., Levine, R. E., McMahon, K. K., Perkowski, L.
C., & Richards, B. F. (2007). Team-based learning at ten medical schools: Two years
later. Medical Education, 41(3), 250-257.
Ting-Toomey, S., & Dorjee, T. (2018). Communicating across cultures: New York, NY:
Guilford.
Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research.
Review of Educational Research, 45(1), 89-125. doi:10.3102/00346543045001089
Trifonovitch, G. J. (1977). Culture learning/culture teaching. Educational Perspectives U6 -
Journal Article, 16(4), 18.
Trilokekar, R. D. (2015). From soft power to economic diplomacy: A comparison of the
changing rationales and roles of the U. S. and Canadian federal governments in
international education. Berkeley, CA: Center for Studies in Higher Education.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 184

Tsegay, S. M., Zegergish, M. Z., & Ashraf, M. A. (2018). Socio-cultural adjustment experiences
of international students in Chinese higher education institutions. Millennial Asia, 9(2),
183-202. doi:10.1177/0976399618786342
Tuckman, B. (2006). Operant conditioning. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference/
article/operant-conditioning/
Umbach, P. D., & Kuh, G. D. (2006). Student experiences with diversity at liberal arts colleges:
another claim for distinctiveness. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(1), 169-192.
doi:10.1080/00221546.2006.11778923
UNESCO. (2016). Global flow of teriary-level students. Retrieved from http://uis.unesco.org/en/
uis-student-flow
UNNC. (2019). Strategy 2020. Retrieved from https://www.nottingham.edu.cn/en/about/
strategy-2020/vision-and-mission.aspx
Valdez, G. (2015). U.S. higher education classroom experiences of undergraduate Chinese
international students. Journal of International Students, 5(2), 188-200.
Volet, S. E., & Ang, G. (2012). Culturally mixed groups on international campuses: an
opportunity for inter-cultural learning. Higher Education Research & Development,
31(1), 21-37. doi:10.1080/07294360.2012.642838
Wan, G. (2001). The learning experience of CHINESE students in AMERICAN universities: A
cross-cultural perspective. College Student Journal, 35(1), 28.
Wang, C., & Mallinckrodt, B. (2006). Acculturation, attachment, and psychosocial adjustment of
Chinese/Taiwanese international students.(Author abstract). Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 53(4), 422. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.53.4.422
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 185

Wang, J. (2014). Positioning of international student education and counter strategies ( 我国来华
留学生教育的基本定位与应对策略). China Higher Education Research(8), 88-92.
doi:10.16298/j.cnki.1004-3667.2014.08.017
Wang, Y. (2004). The strategies of "goblet words": Indirect communication in the Zhuangzi.
Journal of Chinese Philosophy, 31(2), 195-218. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6253.2004.00150.x
Ward, C., Leong, C.-H., & Low, M. (2004). Personality and sojourner adjustment: An
exploration of the big five and the cultural fit proposition. Journal of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, 35(2), 137-151. doi:10.1177/0022022103260719
Ward, C., Masgoret, A., Ho, E., Holmes, P., Cooper, J., Newton, J., & Crabbe, D. (2005).
Interactions with international students: Report prepared for education New Zealand.
Wellington, New Zealand: Center for Applied Cross-cultural Research, Victoria
University of Wellington.
Wiener, H., Plass, H., & Marz, R. (2009). Team-based learning in intensive course format for
first-year medical students. Croatian medical journal, 50(1), 69-76.
Wilkins, S., Balakrishnan, M. S., & Huisman, J. (2012). Student choice in higher education:
Motivations for choosing to study at an international branch campus. Journal of Studies
in International Education, 16(5), 413-433. doi:10.1177/1028315311429002
Will, N. L. (2016). From isolation to inclusion: Learning of the experiences of Chinese
international students in U.S. Journal of International Students, 6(4), 1069-1075.
Williams, T. R. (2005). Exploring the impact of study abroad on students’ intercultural
communication skills: Adaptability and sensitivity. Journal of Studies in International
Education, 9(4), 356-371.
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 186

Yang, J. H. (2009). Research on cross-cultural adaptation of intenational students in China.
Shanghai, China: Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences Press.
Yang, P. (2013). Nonverbal communication in Mandarin Chinese talk-in-interaction.
Saarbrücken, Germany: LAP Lambert Academic Publishing.
Yang, R. P., Noels, K. A., & Saumure, K. D. (2006). Multiple routes to cross-cultural adaptation
for international students: Mapping the paths between self-construals, English language
confidence, and adjustment. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 30(4), 487-
506. doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2005.11.010
Yu, B. (2010). Learning Chinese abroad: The role of language attitudes and motivation in the
adaptation of international students in China. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural
Development, 31(3), 301-321. doi:10.1080/01434631003735483
Zhang, L. (2016). International branch campuses in China: Quest for legitimacy (Doctoral
dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No.
10107769)
Zhao, C.-M., Kuh, G. D., & Carini, R. M. (2005). A comparison of international student and
American student engagement in effective educational practices. The Journal of Higher
Education, 76(2), 209-231. doi:10.1080/00221546.2005.11778911

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 187

APPENDIX A: SURVEY INSTRUMENT
Email Invitation
Hello! My name is Luke Li, Dean of China Enrollment Management of LUC. I am writing to
you as a doctoral candidate in the Rossier School of Education at University of Southern
California. I am conducting a research study as part of my dissertation, examining undergraduate
students’ intercultural integration at LUC.
You are cordially invited to participate in the study to share your opinions and insights
that will help LUC to better facilitate the development of students’ intercultural competence.
If you agree, you are invited to complete an online anonymous survey consisting mainly multiple
choice questions which is anticipated to take no more than 12 minutes to complete. The Qualtrics
survey can be completed conveniently on your laptops, pads or smartphones. You can choose to
enter a draw to win one of four Kindles for your participation by following the instructions on
the confirmation page after submitting this survey. If you indicate your willingness to volunteer
at the end of the survey, you may be also invited to participate in an in-person interview at a
future date.
Participation in this study is completely voluntary. Your identity as a participant will
remain confidential at all times during and after the study. If you would like to participate, please
begin the survey via the link here. Please note that the survey will be closed by September 15
th
.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at hanguoli@usc.edu or 17712677108
(cell phone). Thank you in advance for your participation,
Luke Li
Doctoral Candidate - Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
Online Survey
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 188

Information Sheet (1 item)
Welcome to the research study!
We are interested in understanding how factors related to Knowledge and Motivation of
students as well as organizational factors influence the intercultural integration of undergraduate
students at Lucas University of China. You will be presented with information relevant to
intercultural integration and asked to answer some questions about it. Please be assured that your
responses will be kept completely confidential.
The survey has 38 questions and should take you around 10-12 minutes to complete, and
you can choose to enter a draw to win one of four Kindles for your participation by following the
instructions on the confirmation page after submitting this survey. Your participation in this
research is voluntary. You have the right to withdraw at any point during the study, for any
reason, and without any prejudice. If you would like to contact the Principal Investigator in the
study to discuss this research, please email Luke Hanguo Li at hanguoli@usc.edu.
By selecting “I consent” below, you acknowledge that your participation in the survey is
voluntary, you are 18 years of age or older, and that you are aware that you may choose to
terminate your participation in the survey at any time and for any reason.
Ready? Let’s begin!
1. Please select to proceed:
• I consent
• I do not consent
Demographic Information (3 items)
2. What is your gender?
• Male
• Female
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 189

3. What is your citizenship?
• Chinese Mainland
• Hong Kong/Macau/Taiwan, China
• United States
• Other countries/regions
4. Which of the following statements is the most accurate for you?
• Most or all of my friends at LUC are from the same or similar cultural
background as me.
• Most or all of my friends at LUC are from a different cultural background than
me.
• My friends are a blend of those with the same and different cultural background.
Knowledge (10 items)
5. People who are from a different cultural background than me may have different beliefs
and values.
• Strongly Agree
• Agree
• Somewhat Agree
• Somewhat Disagree
• Disagree
• Strongly Disagree
(Hereafter “Likert-6”)
6. It is important to know about the cultural or ethnic backgrounds of my classmates.
(Likert-6)
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 190

7. Interacting with classmates from different cultural backgrounds helps me develop cross-
cultural abilities.
(Likert-6)
8. I actively learn and ask questions about my classmates’ culture or background.
(Likert-6)
9. I always know what to say when interacting with people from different cultures (G. Chen
& Starosta, 2000).
(Likert-6)
10. I sometimes think about how I interact with classmates who are from different cultures
and try to take actions to improve.
(Likert-6)
11. I often notice similarities in personality between people who belong to completely
different cultures (Arasaratnam, 2009).
(Likert-6)
12. When I interact with classmates who are from different cultures, I am sensitive to subtle
differences in communication and meaning during our interaction (G. Chen & Starosta,
2000).
(Likert-6)
13. I can tell when I have upset my classmates who are from a different culture than me
during our interactions (G. Chen & Starosta, 2000).
(Likert-6)
14. What do you think are the most important factors in successfully working with people
from different cultures? Choose three only. Add other items if you like.
• Knowledge of cultural differences
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 191

• Confidence
• Perseverance
• Language proficiency
• Open-mindedness
• Shared interests and hobbies
• Enthusiasm and motivation
• Empathy
• Shared values
• Other:
• Other:
• Other:
Motivation (16 items)
15. It is difficult to become close friends with classmates from other cultural backgrounds.
(Likert-6)
16. I avoid situations where I have to deal with classmates from other cultural backgrounds.
(G. Chen & Starosta, 2000).
(Likert-6)
17. I believe it is possible for me to effectively adapt to other cultures while maintaining my
own culture.
(Likert-6)
18. My ability to interact with classmates from other cultural backgrounds has improved
since I came to LUC.
(Likert-6)
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 192

19. I am confident that after graduating, I will be able to work well with people from
different countries and backgrounds in a globalized society.
(Likert-6)
20. I feel more successful as a student when I can have effective intercultural interactions at
schools.
(Likert-6)
21. I think there should be more international students at LUC.
(Likert-6)
22. Undertanding how to work or interact with people from other cultures is important for
my future employability.
(Likert-6)
23. I feel that people from other cultures have many valuable insights that I can learn from in
my classes.
(Likert-6)
24. Developing the ability of effective cross-cultural communication and collaboration is one
of the most important reasons that I chose LUC for my college education.
(Likert-6)
25. Learning about China is an imprant goal of my education at LUC.
(Likert-6)
26. I find iteracting with my classmates from differnet cultural backgrounds to be an
interesting experience.
(Likert-6)
27. I susually look for opportunities to itneract with people from other cultures.
(Likert-6)
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 193

28. I did NOT invest enough effort to develop friendships with classmates from different
culgural backgrounds.
(Likert-6)
29. My class mates are interested in learning about my culure.
(Likert-6)
30. I feel more comfortable with people from my own culture than withh people from other
cultures.
(Likert-6)
Organizational (10 items)
31. LUC has established a campsu culture that embraces culture diversity.
(Likert-6)
32. Cultural diversity is one of the defining features of LUC.
(Likert-6)
33. At LUC, I am encouraged to interact with classmates from different cultures.
(Likert-6)
34. The curriculum at LUC has helped me learn more about how to work with people from
different cultures.
(Likert-6)
35. Professors at LUC encourage students to have interactions with classmates from different
cultures.
(Likert-6)
36. The student affairs programs at LUC effectively promotes cultural diversity.
(Likert-6)
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 194

37. LUC provides sufficient extracurricular opportunities for me to develop abilities to work
with people from different cultures.
(Likert-6)
38. LUC offers helpful programs for students to gain knowledge of cultural differences.
(Likert-6)
39. My intercultural experiences at LUC exceeded my expectations.
(Likert-6)
40. If you would, please share your suggestions on what LUC should do to help students
achieve better intercultural integration.
(Text box)
Volunteering for Interview (2 items)
41. Thanks for answering the above questions. Would you be interested in participating in an
in-person interview to share your thoughts on students’ intercultural integration at LUC?
The interview is voluntary and anticipated to last about 30 minutes.
• Yes, I will be happy to participate and share more thoughts
• No. I don’t want to be invited.
42. If your answer to Question 38 is “Yes”, please provide your name and email address for
contact purpose.
(Text boxes for name and email address)

INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 195

APPENDIX B: INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
Respondent (Pseudonym): _______________________________________________
From: □ China □ USA □ Other countries
Location of Interview: ________________________________________________
Time in / Time Out: _________________________________________
Introduction
Thank you very much for meeting with me today. I am conducting this study as part of my
dissertation research with my doctoral program at USC, exploring how well students are
interacting with classmates from different cultural backgrounds and what the university can do to
improve intercultural integration among students. I anticipate taking no more than 30 minutes of
your time.
Your participation is completely voluntary. We can skip any question you want at any time, and
you may stop the interview at any time. Any identifiable information obtained in connection with
this study will remain confidential. If you are comfortable with it, I would like to record our
conversation and the recording will be destroyed after it is transcribed. Do you have any
questions? Ready to begin?
Interview Questions
• Tell me why did you choose LUC for your college education?
o Probe: Was interacting with students from other cultural backgrounds a key part
of your decision to choose LUC?
• What do you think are the most important factors to consider to effectively communicate
with your classmates from different cultural backgrounds?
• What are the challenges you have encountered in your interactions with classmates from
other cultural backgrounds?
INTERCULTURAL INTEGRATION OF STUDENTS 196

• How have you tried to interact better (or more?) with classmates from different cultural
backgrounds?
• How do you feel about your own ability to effectively interact with classmates from
different cultural backgrounds?
• Talk about a course, if any, that helps you better integrate with classmates from other
cultural backgrounds.
• Tell me what extracurricular programs are available at LUC that promote interactions
between students of different cultures.
• How does the school cultivate a culture of embracing cultural diversity and encouraging
intercultural integration? Do you think it does enough—why or why not?
• What suggestions do you have for LUC to better facilitate interactions among students
from different cultural backgrounds?
• Is there anything else you would like to talk about regarding intercultural integration at
LUC?

Abstract (if available)

Abstract In the context of internationalization of higher education worldwide, China has been making an effort to reform, modernize and internationalize its higher education system. One of the most remarkable reforming initiatives was the creation of Sino-Foreign Cooperative Universities (SFCU) which carried the mission of introducing advanced higher education models and practices from different countries to support China’s higher education reforms, promote cross-border educational and research collaboration and foster cross-culturally prepared global citizens. Based on the gap analysis model (Clark & Estes, 2002), this study investigated the knowledge, motivation and organizational influences on intercultural integration among students from various cultural backgrounds in the context of an SFCU located in Eastern China. Surveys and interviews were utilized to collect data from sophomore students to validate the assumed influences and assess the degree to which the university had been able to create an environment supporting students’ intercultural integration and development of their intercultural competency. Based on the findings, the assumed influences were validated, and the university was found to have successfully established a campus culture, academic environment and student programs that embraced cultural diversity and facilitated the development of students’ intercultural competency. Areas for further improvement were also identified. Solutions were recommended with implementation and evaluation plans.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Preparing students for the 21st century labor market through liberal arts education at a Chinese joint venture university

PDF

Faculty retention at private colleges in China

PDF

Teaching quality in Zhejiang University of Technology

PDF

Advancing Black identity and culture in predominantly White colleges and universities: a promising practice study

PDF

Senior university officials' approaches to global engagement: a case study of a private and a public research university

PDF

Making a case for teaching religious literacy in Ethiopian schools: an innovation study

PDF

Standards as drivers of internationalization

PDF

Creating a faith-integrated Bachelor of Science nursing program: an innovation model

PDF

Intentional, pedagogically driven, and systematic use of technology in teaching practice

PDF

Faculty internationalization at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology (HKUST): a promising practice study

PDF

Advisor impact on student veterans at a post-secondary institution: an evaluation study

PDF

Measuring student persistence at an alternative charter high school: internal school evaluation and external policy implications

PDF

Making the global local: Sino-foreign cooperation universities, interdisciplinary study and 21st-century skills

PDF

Chinese students’ preparedness for university studies in the United States

PDF

A California community college's climate action plan: an evaluation study

PDF

Competency in a blended workforce: an evaluation study of contracted labor development challenges

PDF

Enhancing the international student experience through graduate employment preparedness

PDF

Understanding indigenous ʻike: the impact on sense of belonging and local identity on Hawaiʻi’s students

PDF

Effective course design for improving student learning: a case study in application

PDF

Expanding bilingualism and biliteracy through a student-centered culturally relevant pedagogy in secondary schools: An innovation gap analysis

Asset Metadata

Creator Li, Hanguo (author)

Core Title Intercultural integration of students at a Sino-foreign cooperative university in China: an evaluation study

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Global Executive

Publication Date 07/19/2020

Defense Date 07/07/2020

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag branch campus,China,cultural adaptation,globalization of higher education,intercultural integration,joint venture university,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Tambascia, Tracy (committee chair)

Creator Email hanguo.li@dukekunshan.edu.cn,hl39@duke.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-335122

Unique identifier UC11664204

Identifier etd-LiHanguo-8704.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-335122 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-LiHanguo-8704.pdf

Dmrecord 335122

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Li, Hanguo

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA