Critical Analysis of Cadman’s Research on International Postgraduates and Supervisors’ Learning Experience

Introduction

In order to provide effective teaching-learning process, the educational system must be able to know first the learning strategies of each student. Students have different learning strategies and personalities for acquiring and practicing knowledge. Herein, it can be said that students can have different learning strategies to improve on a specific learning tasks. To assist international students with Confucian Heritage Cultures (CHC) and/or non-English Speaking Background (NESB) students who may have “difficulties in expression, academic background, essay writing and general confidence” (Borland and Pearce, 1999, p. 104), a growing number of bridging programs have been offered in Australian Universities. After researching the learning experience of international postgraduates and their supervisors in the Integrated Bridging Programme (IBP) at the University of Adelaide, Cadman (2000) argues that kind of bridging programme is useful to accomplish “transculturalism” in higher education.

With this, this paper offers a critical review of Cadman’s research titled “Voices in the Air: evaluations of the learning experiences of international postgraduates and their supervisors. “ This paper started with a brief introduction on Cadman’s research and explores ranges of approaches to epistemology. The synopsis and research classification were also presented followed by the discussion of research strategy. In research strategy, the discussion of research classification such as the constructivist-hermeneutic-interpretivist-qualitative paradigm was illustrated. Apparently, the strengths and weaknesses of Cadman’s research were also discussed.  And finally, conclusion and recommendation pertaining to the goal of this paper were formed.

Synopsis and Research Classification

From 1996 to 1997, at the time that the research was conducted, Cadman, the designer and coordinator of the IBP, drafted and sent an additional questionnaire (in English) by post to both IBP postgraduates and their supervisors. This helps in finding out any particular challenges that international postgraduates face.

Research Strategy:  Action Research

Cadman started researching on the learning experience of international postgraduates and their supervisors from the location of her job – University of Adelaide and the IBP. As Trahar (2006) examines that,

“I am interested in what happens in my ‘classroom’, but I am also interested in the meaning of what happen for those of is involved in the ‘event’ and how that meaning is influenced by the ways in which we connect together past and present, self and other”  (p.201-209)

This kind of “action research” in education, as Altricher, Posch, and Somekh (1993) defined is “an active approach which draws on the perspectives of those embedded within a particular situation to examine their own context” (cited in Sikes, 2008, p. 66). Action research is neither a method nor a paradigm but a strategy that emphasises the intertwined relationship between researchers and respondents. Sikes argues that an education practitioner in the role of researcher is increasingly common, as an insider would be able to contribute a fruitful understanding of a particular institution as well as to demonstrate certain research skills. Sikes (2008) gives an example from Canada and points out those education practitioners are increasingly invited to conduct researches of their own institutions in order to promote higher job positions. Cadman, who has over 10 years experience in participating in the coordination of the IBP, has an advantageous position in the University of Adelaide as well as rich knowledge on the IBP. Thus, it is not surprising that Cadman kicks off the research within her connection and network. In Hong Kong, apart from government-funded universities, community colleges and private education providers are subsequently use of “action research” to enhance professional standard and to secure higher academic ranking in global education.

Research Classification: Constructivist-Hermeneutic-Interpretivist- Qualitative Paradigm (Dills and Romiszowski, 1997)

Cadman designs the research on international postgraduates and their supervisors’ learning experience from the proposition that transculturalism in higher education should be approached as a complex issue involving the negotiation of international postgraduates and their supervisors.  Despite the use of quantitative research method – questionnaire, Cadman searches for hermeneutic paradigm that “interprets” and “understands” social and cultural phenomenon through language (Crotty, 2003, p.88 and p.100). Usher (1998) defines the word “hermeneutic” as “fusion of horizons”, which refers to “ladders of reflections” that demonstrate stance and meaning (Scott and Usher, 1998, p.144) stresses the importance of “interpretation” in hermeneutic paradigm, and claims that “a social science is said to be hermeneutic if it follows the ‘interpretative method’, if it proceeds by way of ‘interpretation’…demarcates the social sciences from the natural sciences because of their interpretative procedure” (Ruth, 2004, p.29). In Cadman’s research, it is apparent that natural science is unachievable as reflections of the IBP students are “open and indeterminate” (Scott and Usher, 1998, p.14). Therefore, Cadman’s research propounds hermeneutic-interpretive rather than positivist epistemology as data collection draws merely from the “open-ended questions” in questionnaires, which provide an instant and genuine reflections and interpretations of the respondents. The “human inquiry” (Cadman, 2000, p.478), or “hermeneutic phenomenological reflections” (Van Manen, 1990, p. 77-109, cited in Cadman, 1997, p.5) of IBP participants, reveal “unknowable” and “ineffable” social experiences that cannot be fully explained by natural science or history (Crotty, 2003, p. 94). For example, an IBP student LF2/31 comments: “I still don’t know much more my area and you wanted us to discuss an issue related to that already… (p.480)” is qualitative and interpretative without doubt, showing a comprehensive and detailed explanation on how IBP affects his/her life experience.

Apart from interpretative nature mentioned above, hermeneutic paradigm stresses on subjective and personal judgement as empirical records. As Harbamas (1971) defines, hermeneutic paradigm is a kind of conventional epistemology, which ought to be: (1) humanistic in nature, (2) subjectively described or interpreted, and (3) valued for the benefit of self-actualisation. Interpretations, therefore, are fluctuate expressions motivated by distinctive actors, experiences to contexts.  As Cadman argued “it seems clear that Australian academic conventions are neither adequate nor appropriate to facilitate change…” (p.480, respond to LF2/31’s comment). This shows Cadman’s subjectivity in the evaluation of “voices” as “language of the academic writer’s position or contentions, integrated into the text with information from external sources” (Cadman, 1997, p.5).

Embedding subjectivity in interpretations, language works as a powerful resource to shape and construct the so-called “social reality”. As many researchers claim, quantitative researches represent findings numerically, whereas qualitative researches represent findings textually, language is therefore viewed as a unique and dominant communication medium.  Giddens suggests the notion of “double hermeneutic” as a “two way connection between the language of social science and ordinary language” (cited in Crotty, 1998, p. 56), uncovering normalisation and manipulation of meaning construction by language. In Cadman’s research, it is noticeable that language constructions exist everywhere, for example, “voices” and “transculturalism” are “interpreted world” of Cadman’s for presenting, transferring and establishing her education values.

At this point, this paper aims to go further in discussing constructivist approach in Cadman’s research. Schwandt defines “constructivism” as the “instrumental and practical function of theory construction and knowing” (cited in Schwarz and Tourangeau, 1999, p.125) while Guba and Lincoln suggest the inclusion of constructivist approach in hermeneutic paradigm as to “make sense” of the research by admiring contributions of individual participants who show how things “really work” (cited in Dills and Romiszowski, 1997, p.170). in terms of advocacy, Cadman stressed that international postgraduate students should “find strategies for change in order to avoid being reduced in their own eyes to ‘barbarian’ status in their departments” (Cadman, 2000, p.483) as well as an investment and exploration to the IBP-liked programme throughout Australia international education display the practical features of the research.

Strength: Education Implication for Establishing Cross-Cultural Dialogue

A significant education outcome of Cadman’s research on international postgraduates and their supervisors’ learning experience was the attempt in establishing dialogues between cross-border learners and western educators. This paper argues that “voices” in Cadman’s research evolves understanding and appreciation towards different cultural backgrounds, thus open up areas for collaboration and cooperation in education researches.

The discovery of “voices in the air” offers encouragement and support for further researches in cross-cultural education study. For instance, Crossley (2010) found out that the bridging between ‘east and west’ as well as ‘north and south’ (p.325) not only draws global attention of alternative cultures but also helps creating more balanced cross-cultural collaborations in an intensified globalisation environment. Trahar (2006) also shares similar view concerning the exchange of ‘international’ voices which helps in revealing the marginal’s perspective in order “to avoid the dominance of majority voices” (p.15). Cadman has taken a step forward to challenge the common understanding that ‘western culture is the normative’ and tried to call for an appreciation of the so-called “barbarian” cultures, it is acknowledgeable that Cadman has helped to establish dialogues between “east and west” and destructing “boundaries by listening voices across borders” (Trahar, 2006, p.14).  Therefore, the cross-disciplinary researches and global education collaborations contribute to mutual understanding and respect in cultures. For example, in Hong Kong and many cities all over the world, numbers of universities are offering “visiting scholars” programs to global postgraduates and academics for short-term academic and cultural exchanges. Through connecting local and global scholars in the same field, these programs help building a global scholar hub as well as benefiting local research from researchers with background of other cultures.

Weaknesses: (1) Poor Conceptualisation of “Transculturalism”

Cadman fails to consider an important point concerning conceptualisation. As Babbie (2010) pointed out, “although conceptualisation is a continuing process, it is vital to address it specifically at the beginning of any study design” (p.141). “Transculturalism” (Salvadori, 1997, cited in Cadman, 2000, p.481) is the core set of value in Cadman’s research. Though Cadman (2000) has put an effort in differentiating “intercultural” education and “transcultural” education, the conceptualisation of “transculturalism” is weak and insufficient.

Basically, poor conceptualisation in a hermeneutic-interpretative education research can be dangerous. First, without clear concept about what “transculturalism” is, it is difficult for Cadman to operationalise the research question. Thus, the research looks creepy because of the ignorance of Cadman and the IBP respondents towards “transculturalism”.

Second, as Babbie (2010) argues, conceptualisation is vital to readers because:

“Even if someone disagreed with our definition, that person would have good idea how to interpret our research results, because what we meant by (a concept)—reflected in our analyses and conclusions—would be precise and clear (p.142).”

Essentially, Cadman simplifies “transculturalism” and assumes that all readers have a full understanding. Learning from Martinson and Schulz (2008) who offer a detailed and comprehensive conceptualisation in their book Transcultural German studies: building bridges, “transcultural perspective” is a research paradigm to investigate how “changes has taken or is taking place through intercultural contact” (p.91). Revisiting Cadman’s research, though it states clearly that “transculturalism” is originated from Salvadori, meaning “the creation of a critical, comparative and systematic perspective of existing cultures” (1997, p.187, cited in Cadman, 2000, p.481), it offers no further clarification or explanation for readers. It can be dangerous as readers may misinterpret the research because of this. Using the example of my experience to illustrate further, at first sight I thought Cadman’s research aimed at explaining how the IBP assist CHC students in adapting and overcoming learning. However, I questioned myself against this observation since the research does not look like “transculturalism” as it does not offer any interpretation or discussion towards culture.

Weaknesses: (2) Bias Research Design from an Insider’s view

As stated previously, Cadman were both IBP course coordinator and researcher. Although an insider may offer better understanding of the context, as well as able to complete a research with limited time and resources, it is undeniable that Cadman shows certain degrees of bias in the research.

Actually, the research paper was undoubtedly positive, it offers only positive comment but no criticism or negative comment on the IBP. For instance, “the IBP was the lifeline they (the newly-admitted international students) hung on to” (p.483) and “supervisors also commented perceptively…” (p.487) shape the brilliant image that the IBP does only good but no harm. Not only this projection fails to offer readers a whole picture of transcultural education, it is also “an ethical and moral failing” (Sikes, 2008, p.156) for a researcher to manipulate false impression as to uphold dominant power. As Hammersley (2000) criticises, biases in the collection, interpretation and presentation of research data “favour false results that are in line with their pre-judgements and political or practical commitments” (p. 152). Hooks also argues that researchers should aware becoming “more central to the discourse” (cited in Trahar, p.201-209).

In addition, Cadman’s authority may have influence on the sampling she selected. As Bordens & Horowitz (2002) argue, it may be impossible to do research nationwide but researcher must select samples that are representative (p.91). Though the IBP programme may have inspired Cadman’s research interest, it is questionable that the focus on one university, one year and one programme is sufficient to explain the deep-rooted conflicts between CHC students and local educators, as well as the complexities of market-driven Australia higher education. Bordens and Horowitz (2002) put forward that a biased sample “does not adequately represent the larger population” (p.187). In addition, Cadman’s authority may also affect the attitude and comments of the IBP students and supervisors. Though Cadman may not intend to “scare” them, the IBP participants may be afraid to challenge the programme because of Cadman’s authority as the coordinator. The use of questionnaires has also hindered the researcher’s potential to read the respondents’ facial expression, to ask follow-up and to identify if any lying exists.  

Finally yet importantly, since the research method questionnaires rely greatly on respondents’ understanding and interpretation, bias may be incorporated in language construction. As Cadman has an ultimate power to control what language to be used, what questions to be asked, and what wordings to be identified, and so on, this paper argues that the questions order, format, wordings and context may affect respondents’ interpretations (Schwarz, 1999) While data are collected from the open-ended questions only, it is doubtful that CHC or NESB students may not have sufficient knowledge to understand the English questions thoroughly and to use English to express freely. As Bordens and Horowitz (2002) argues, “the moral is that you must consider the meaning of words from the point of view the people answering the questions (p.187)”, the use of language should therefore avoid bias and subjective construction of social reality.

Conclusion and Recommendation

The learning of different language is important in today’s setting. The help needed by international students with Confucian Heritage Cultures (CHC) and/or non-English Speaking Background (NESB) students who may have “difficulties in expression, academic background, essay writing and general confidence” was a necessity in this period. Recent works on this subject has constantly presented in Cadman’s research. This is especially true for those still in school. This apparent need has prompted educational institutions to create several different second language programs that would be able to help students in their learning needs. Cadman (2000) further stated that in doing such actions in the educational system, it is inherent that a “language-competent” society will come about.

More often than not when English or any other second language is taught in the classroom setting as a foreign language, the classroom grows to be an imperative background where learners strengthen and build up their language learning. Nonetheless, a number of learners are not disposed to acquire a certain level of risks and interact and participate in the said language classrooms. Consequently, this may hold back their language development.

Thus, as a suggestion, there is a need for educational authorities to evaluate the current conditions of the academic arena. The continuous understanding of the current trends and its applicability to the area of specialization is very crucial if not vulnerable. The role of the government is also imperative. Similarly, supervisors need to upgrade their know-how as well as ability in relation to teaching and imparting knowledge. I personally believe that there is something much better that discovery learning can give. Aside from making the learning experience more interesting and encompassing, it deviates from the traditional practice of ‘spoon-feeding’ or rote learning as seen in traditional medium of instruction. The technologies that we have today surely allow and help every student to reach their maximum potentials in becoming productive citizens.

To end, before categorically defining which effective and quiet ineffective pedagogical approach is, it is important to know that learning depends to some degree on the theoretical lens a person use to look at it. For instance, the behaviourist lens sees it as the acquisition of knowledge and skills that changes a person’s behaviour. On the other hand, the cognitive theorist’s lens focuses more on the acquisition of knowledge than on the resulting behaviour change. Thus, it is safe to state that whatever strategy in learning used in education, effects will be remain constant given the fact that the subject of application, area of study, the teacher’s and students’ factors, and other potential affecting factors are carefully studied and considered.

In accordance to Cadman’s research on ‘Voices in the Air’: evaluations of the learning experiences of international postgraduates and their supervisors, it was identified and concluded that the hermeneutic-interpretive epistemology in the research may seem valuable to future researchers and cross-cultural education practitioners but stay on problematic in areas of conceptualisation and research design. In view of the above, this paper recommends the following strategies:

Reflexivity and Critical Evaluation to Supplement Hermeneutic-interpretive Approach

This paper uses Etherington (2004) to criticise that hermeneutic approach stresses on subjective interpretations with no emphasis on critical evaluation from the researcher. Representing the Australia higher education sector in reviewing the IBP, Cadman may take her “cultural expectations” (the notion of transculturalism) into account and assess critically against the ideological meanings behind narrative reflections of IBP students and their supervisors (Trahar, 2006, p.17). An example from Choi (1997) who conducted research on Korean students’ learning experience in Australia offers a wider and more critical review on intercultural communications in academic settings. Choi’s research finds that issues such as “cultural shock”, “teacher-student relationships” as well as “institutional environments” are troubles of international students in the West. Perhaps Cadman can leave her knowledge of the IBP alone and exercise a more open, reflexive and critical judgment to uncover the actual “voices” in social and cultural context, this paper believes that Cadman will then be able to draw powerful and critical justifications in challenging “dominant Western educational values” (Cadman, 2000, p.478).

Clear Conceptualisation and Careful Research Design

As mentioned in the previous part, clear conceptualisation is vital to help readers following the research framework. Therefore, this paper suggests Cadman to define or explain the meaning of “transculturalism” at the introduction, and to revisit this concept in some of the major arguments.

For research design, this paper supports the use of hermeneutic-interpretive qualitative approach but argues that questionnaire is an inappropriate methodology. Though Cadman is able to obtain qualitative data through open-ended questions in the questionnaires, the exclusion of numeric data has not been justified. The reflections of IBP students, for example, MOP 3/17’s “…The University should pay attention to building a good link between students and supervisors” (p.483, my emphasis) visibly shows the incapability for the student to explain ‘good link’ in a clear and explicit way, which may lead to misinterpretation. This paper suggests a replacement of research method from questionnaire to interview or focus group for opening dialogue of both the researcher and the respondents so that they can ask immediately if in doubt.

Mixture of qualitative and qualitative methods is becoming more common in social researches. Creswell (2003) points out that Campbell and Fiske found multi-methods in social research in 1959, while the mixture soon became more common in social researches (p.15). One of the most significant benefits of mixing qualitative and quantitative methods is that researcher can benefit from both research methods, such as  generalisability in quantitative methods and in-depth narration in qualitative methods. This paper suggests that, on top of questionnaires, Cadman can implement one more qualitative research method such as interview, observation or focus group as complement of open-ended questions in questionnaires.

Comparative or Cross-cultural Research to Avoid Personal Bias

Though Cadman’s insider view shows a number of biases, it is undeniable that action research (by an insider) is a global trend in education research that being encouraged by various institutions. One of the common ways to tackle insider’s bias is to invite “outsiders” to assist or take over the research but it would need more resources or funding to achieve.  In light of this, this paper suggests Cadman to adopt a comparative research technique to broaden the sample base of her research. For example, Cadman can compare feedbacks of the newly admitted IBP students to feedbacks of previous-year IBP students. Also, it would be more representative if samples can draw from the IBP as well as similar programme in other universities in Australia. To explore the research in a “transcultural” sense, Cadman may think of comparing the learning experience of international postgraduates and their supervisors of Australia to experience in other countries, such as the New Zealand, the United States or the United Kingdom where their higher education recruit relatively high proportion of CHC or NESB international students. Use another insider research by Bradmore and Smyrnios (2009) to illustrate, although they are insiders of the RMIT University in Australia, their research “The writing on the wall: responses of Australian public universities to competition in global higher education” has successfully eliminated most biases that exist in Cadman’s research. First, Bradmore and Smyrnios have compared all the public universities in Australia so that their authority in RMIT University has been minimised. Second, the use of a small-scare longitudinal study from 2005 to 2007 would be able to offer a more comprehensive depiction of context changes in Australia higher education.

In terms of contribution, despite of this paper’s limited discussion on the bright side of Cadman’s research, this paper not only explained the constructivist-hermeneutic-interpretivist-qualitative paradigm in education research, but also pointed out the shortcomings of unclear conceptualisation, insider’s bias, restricted sample size, and inappropriate methodology in Cadman’s research. The critiques raise a possibility of intensifying comparative research and critical reflexivity so that resources and attention on “transcultural” higher education will be nurtured.

Bibliography

Babbie, E.R. (2010) The Practice of Social Research, Belmont, Calif: Wadsworth Cengage.

Bordens, K. S. and Horowitz, I. A. (2002) Social Psychology. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Borland, H. and Pearce, A. (1999) Valuing Diversity: Experiences and achievements of NESB students at Victoria University, Melbourne: Victoria University of Technology: Centre for Educational Development and Support.

Bradmore, D. and Smyrnios, K. (2009) ‘The writing on the wall: responses of Australian public universities to competition in global higher education’ Higher Education Research & Development Vol. 28, No. 5, pp. 495 – 508.

Cadman, K. (1997) The ‘Songlines’ of academic writing: Integrating the voices of international and NESB students into their texts, in R. Murray-Harvey & H. Silins eds, Learning and Teaching in Higher Education: Advancing International Perspectives, pp. 37-50.

Cadman, K. (2000) ‘Voices in the air’: Evaluations of the learning experiences of international postgraduates and their supervisors, Teaching in Higher Education vol. 5 no. 4, pp. 475-491.

Choi, M. (1997) ‘Korean Students in Australian Universities: Intercultural Issues’, Higher Education Research & Development 16.3 (1997): 263-82.

Creswell, J.W. (2003) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Crystal, D. (1997) English as a Global Language. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Crossley, M.W. (2010) ‘Context matters in educational research and international development: Learning from the small states experience’ Prospects, xxxx(4).

Crotty, M. (1998) The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process, London: Sage Publications.

Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (eds) (1994) Handbook of Qualitative Research, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Dills, C. R., & Romiszowski, A. J. (1997) The instructional development paradigm: An introduction. In C. R. Dills, and A. J. Romiszowski (Eds.) Instructional development paradigms, Englewood, NJ: Educational Technology Publications, Inc.

Etherington, K. (2004) Becoming a Reflexive Researcher: Using Our Selves in Research, London: Jessica Kingsley.

Guba, E.G. and Lincoln, Y.S. (2000) Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences in Denzin, N.K. and Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research, 2nd ed, London: Sage Publications.

Hammersley, M. (2000) Taking Sides in Social Research. Essays on Partisanship and Bias, London: Routledge.

Jurgen, H. (1971) Knowledge and Human Interests, Boston: Beacon, 1971.

Martinson, S.D. (2008) Transcultural German Studies: Building Bridges, Peter Lang.

Schwarz, N. (1999). Cognitive research into survey measurement: Its influence on survey methodology and cognitive theory. In M. G. Sirken, D. J. Herrmann, S. Schechter, N. Schwarz, J. M. Tanur, & R. Tourangeau (Eds.) Cognition and Survey Research. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

Scott, D. and Usher, R. (1998) Researching Education: Data, Methods and Theory in Educational Enquiry, London: Cassell.

Ruth, A. (2004) Charles Taylor, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP.

Sikes, P.J. & Potts, A. (2008) Researching Education from the Inside: Investigations from within, London: Routledge.

Trahar, S. (2006) Narrative Research on Learning: Comparative and International Perspectives, Oxford: Symposium.